4 ms·

I read comments about this phenomenon in SF regularly here, so it must be really bad. But as an European who has made some trips to America but never been to SF

I read comments about this phenomenon in SF regularly here, so it must be really bad. But as an European who has made some trips to America but never been to SF in particular, it's difficult to understand why there is such a high density of unpleasant homeless people specifically in that city, and not in others. Anyone care to explain or hypothesize on reasons?

varelse 10y ago
According to this study of homeless people in nearby Santa Cruz (https://blog.civinomics.com/2015/04/07/the-reality-of-homelessness-in-santa-cruz/ https://blog.civinomics.com/2015/04/07/the-reality-of-homele...), ~1/3 the climate, ~1/5 each the social programs and lifestyle, followed by several other factors. I imagine the views of SF homeless are similar.
Inconel 10y ago
I'll do my best to give some reasons but this list is by no means exhaustive. In general I would say there are two main issues at play, one is that SF is relatively welcoming of homeless people, the second is that most other US cities are incredibly unwelcoming. So you end up with a homeless population both being pulled to SF and at the same time pushed into SF by other cities. Some of this is simple geography. It's much easier to be homeless in a dense (by US standards) city than a sprawled out suburb. SF also has decent public transit, again largely due to the necessary density, which makes being homeless easier. SF also has a relatively mild climate. Yes, the fog and the dampness/rain do suck, but it rarely gets either extremely cold or hot. Outside of geography, some cities are known for being extremely hostile to the homeless through policy and actively try and push their homeless out. I believe some cities, Las Vegas if my memory is correct, have been caught giving bus tickets to SF to their homeless. I know there are cities in Orange County where the police have been known to pick up homeless people and drop them off in neighboring cities. So, SF tends to get stuck with homeless problems that should be shared between many other cities/regions. SF also tends to have pretty good homeless services in terms of things like food kitchens and temporary housing/shelters. I will also add that having grown up partly in SF, and having spent some time living on the streets (more accurately parks) there, I don't think SF's reputation as a dirty city is entirely due to the homeless population. The people in SF, even those with multi million dollars houses, just don't really seem to care much. I've seen plenty of what I assume to be well employed people litter and no one really bats an eye. It also isn't unusual to see non-homeless people urinating in the streets after bars close. Again, I just don't think there is a critical mass of people that care enough, and I get the strong impression that those that do care don't really want to say anything since it could be interpreted as being intolerant. I think the fact that you have a large number of young single tech workers who probably don't have plans to stay in the city long term leads to a lack of civic pride. Additionally, while there are many wonderful aspects of the tolerance that SF is know for, I do believe that many people end up being too accepting of what is and isn't acceptable public behavior. This is probably complicated by the fact that I don't actually think SF is nearly as progressive as it claims, it's mostly virtue signaling. It's much easier to say you're progressive by tolerating all sort of behaviors that aren't particularly healthy, than it is to try and help the underlying causes of those behaviors. It's very late here so my apologies if this wasn't a good explanation.
- Al-Khwarizmi 10y ago
  I think it was an excellent explanation, thanks. It sounds like a perfect storm of factors, with no obvious solution.
- DrScump 10y ago
  I don't think SF's reputation as a dirty city is entirely due to the homeless population In some contexts, littering almost seems to be a brand of counterculture rebellion. Recurring problems at Delores Park[0] unrelated to homeless gatherings is a classic example. [0] http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Dolores-Park-Friends-will-pick-up-your-trash-to-6173445.php http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Dolores-Park-Friends-w...
manarth 10y ago
I visited SF a tourist just over a year ago, and I didn't experience any of the issues being described. Sure, in places, there were homeless people sitting in doorways, and some of them asked whether I could spare any change - much like homeless people in many other cities. I didn't experience any of them shouting at me, shooting up drugs, demanding money, or peeing in the street. I didn't notice anywhere smelling of urine (although the sea lions around Pier 39 where a little bit stinky). SF has its issues, like most cities around the world, but I don't think they're as severe or widespread as is being suggested.
- justin_vanw 10y ago
  You visited a bunch of the 'clean' tourist neighborhoods. How can you actually think you are qualified to have an opinion here after visiting part of a city one time?
  - manarth 10y ago
    How can you actually think you are qualified to have an opinion here after visiting part of a city one time? Well, you know what they say: "Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks." There's very little data in these comments. Lots of anecdata, and I'm presenting an alternative perspective with my anecdata, but until there's actual data in the discussion, I'm not sure that we should be dismissing someone else's opinion out of hand. From the context: parent said "as a European who has made some trips to America but never been to SF in particular", so I thought it appropriate to reply with my experience as a European who has been to SF in particular. My experience there was simply my experience: I didn't observe the antisocial behaviour being described, so it's fair to say that it's not common behaviour (in the areas I visited). That's not to say it doesn't exist, or that it isn't more common elsewhere in SF. That said, homeless people do tend to congregate in areas where tourists visit, so you would expect the density of homeless people to be highest in those tourist areas, and for those places to experience the most severe issues.
- Inconel 10y ago
  I can imagine that it's possible to visit SF and not experience aggressive panhandling, the shouts of people with mental health issues, public urination and defecation, and open drug use, but I find it very hard to believe you could experience much of the city without the smell of urine at least a few times. Even touristy, well trafficked areas, Powell St station for instance, will very often smell of urine. On my most recent visit back to the city around the holidays, I saw a young looking couple shooting up on 21st and Valencia, albeit this was at night, and I almost had someone poop on me while waiting at the crosswalk at Sutter and Montgomery, this was at 4pm on a Sunday afternoon.
analog31 10y ago
I've read that a large proportion of the homeless in SF are from SF. My hunch is that the economics of the city are causing a lot of lower income people to be placed at risk of losing their housing options. The difference may be in how European and American cities treat people who are "almost" homeless.

varelse 10y ago

According to this study of homeless people in nearby Santa Cruz (https://blog.civinomics.com/2015/04/07/the-reality-of-homelessness-in-santa-cruz/ https://blog.civinomics.com/2015/04/07/the-reality-of-homele...), ~1/3 the climate, ~1/5 each the social programs and lifestyle, followed by several other factors. I imagine the views of SF homeless are similar.

Inconel 10y ago

I'll do my best to give some reasons but this list is by no means exhaustive. In general I would say there are two main issues at play, one is that SF is relatively welcoming of homeless people, the second is that most other US cities are incredibly unwelcoming. So you end up with a homeless population both being pulled to SF and at the same time pushed into SF by other cities. Some of this is simple geography. It's much easier to be homeless in a dense (by US standards) city than a sprawled out suburb. SF also has decent public transit, again largely due to the necessary density, which makes being homeless easier. SF also has a relatively mild climate. Yes, the fog and the dampness/rain do suck, but it rarely gets either extremely cold or hot. Outside of geography, some cities are known for being extremely hostile to the homeless through policy and actively try and push their homeless out. I believe some cities, Las Vegas if my memory is correct, have been caught giving bus tickets to SF to their homeless. I know there are cities in Orange County where the police have been known to pick up homeless people and drop them off in neighboring cities. So, SF tends to get stuck with homeless problems that should be shared between many other cities/regions. SF also tends to have pretty good homeless services in terms of things like food kitchens and temporary housing/shelters. I will also add that having grown up partly in SF, and having spent some time living on the streets (more accurately parks) there, I don't think SF's reputation as a dirty city is entirely due to the homeless population. The people in SF, even those with multi million dollars houses, just don't really seem to care much. I've seen plenty of what I assume to be well employed people litter and no one really bats an eye. It also isn't unusual to see non-homeless people urinating in the streets after bars close. Again, I just don't think there is a critical mass of people that care enough, and I get the strong impression that those that do care don't really want to say anything since it could be interpreted as being intolerant. I think the fact that you have a large number of young single tech workers who probably don't have plans to stay in the city long term leads to a lack of civic pride. Additionally, while there are many wonderful aspects of the tolerance that SF is know for, I do believe that many people end up being too accepting of what is and isn't acceptable public behavior. This is probably complicated by the fact that I don't actually think SF is nearly as progressive as it claims, it's mostly virtue signaling. It's much easier to say you're progressive by tolerating all sort of behaviors that aren't particularly healthy, than it is to try and help the underlying causes of those behaviors. It's very late here so my apologies if this wasn't a good explanation.

Al-Khwarizmi 10y ago
I think it was an excellent explanation, thanks. It sounds like a perfect storm of factors, with no obvious solution.
DrScump 10y ago
I don't think SF's reputation as a dirty city is entirely due to the homeless population In some contexts, littering almost seems to be a brand of counterculture rebellion. Recurring problems at Delores Park[0] unrelated to homeless gatherings is a classic example. [0] http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Dolores-Park-Friends-will-pick-up-your-trash-to-6173445.php http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Dolores-Park-Friends-w...

manarth 10y ago

I visited SF a tourist just over a year ago, and I didn't experience any of the issues being described. Sure, in places, there were homeless people sitting in doorways, and some of them asked whether I could spare any change - much like homeless people in many other cities. I didn't experience any of them shouting at me, shooting up drugs, demanding money, or peeing in the street. I didn't notice anywhere smelling of urine (although the sea lions around Pier 39 where a little bit stinky). SF has its issues, like most cities around the world, but I don't think they're as severe or widespread as is being suggested.

justin_vanw 10y ago
You visited a bunch of the 'clean' tourist neighborhoods. How can you actually think you are qualified to have an opinion here after visiting part of a city one time?
- manarth 10y ago
  How can you actually think you are qualified to have an opinion here after visiting part of a city one time? Well, you know what they say: "Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks." There's very little data in these comments. Lots of anecdata, and I'm presenting an alternative perspective with my anecdata, but until there's actual data in the discussion, I'm not sure that we should be dismissing someone else's opinion out of hand. From the context: parent said "as a European who has made some trips to America but never been to SF in particular", so I thought it appropriate to reply with my experience as a European who has been to SF in particular. My experience there was simply my experience: I didn't observe the antisocial behaviour being described, so it's fair to say that it's not common behaviour (in the areas I visited). That's not to say it doesn't exist, or that it isn't more common elsewhere in SF. That said, homeless people do tend to congregate in areas where tourists visit, so you would expect the density of homeless people to be highest in those tourist areas, and for those places to experience the most severe issues.
Inconel 10y ago
I can imagine that it's possible to visit SF and not experience aggressive panhandling, the shouts of people with mental health issues, public urination and defecation, and open drug use, but I find it very hard to believe you could experience much of the city without the smell of urine at least a few times. Even touristy, well trafficked areas, Powell St station for instance, will very often smell of urine. On my most recent visit back to the city around the holidays, I saw a young looking couple shooting up on 21st and Valencia, albeit this was at night, and I almost had someone poop on me while waiting at the crosswalk at Sutter and Montgomery, this was at 4pm on a Sunday afternoon.

analog31 10y ago

I've read that a large proportion of the homeless in SF are from SF. My hunch is that the economics of the city are causing a lot of lower income people to be placed at risk of losing their housing options. The difference may be in how European and American cities treat people who are "almost" homeless.