> SF goes further than any city I've seen to provide services to the homeless. Maybe? It's difficult to track the money. Per capita SF doesn't even have the hi

> SF goes further than any city I've seen to provide services to the homeless. Maybe? It's difficult to track the money. Per capita SF doesn't even have the highest amount of homeless and yet you rarely see them on the streets in NYC and other major cities (and it's not because they're all in jail; NYC spent over a $1 billion in 2014 on homeless services and shelters and recently NY state started a $10 billion initiative to help the homeless). I wish SF did a better job tracking where the funds go and how effective they are being spent. > a city that likely ships them here This is a bit of a myth. In a 2015 report [1] only 10% of the homeless in SF came from another state. 71% of the homeless lived in SF itself and then became homeless. > "takes care of it" so you don't see it NYC has over 200 shelters. Many of the shelters in SF have waiting lists of several hundred people to the point where they have to live in tents which can be pretty dangerous in and of itself. Granted not all of the shelters are like that but many are and when you can't even stay in a shelter it doesn't really give them a lot of choice. > The poor will always be with us, and we are judged by how we treat them. I agree! It's far safer to have them off of the streets in many respects by providing affordable housing, temporary housing and even shelters. SF just doesn't have enough of that to go around for the homeless. I would love to see them expand their shelter services to provide more places for them to stay. But that certainly doesn't mean I want someone to "take care of it" so I "don't see it". I think your comment came off a bit crass by assuming parent wanted to not see them and calling them naive. [1] https://sfgov.org/lhcb/sites/default/files/2015%20San%20Francisco%20Homeless%20Count%20%20Report_0.pdf https://sfgov.org/lhcb/sites/default/files/2015%20San%20Fran...