7 ms·

One thing I haven't heard discussed, and would like to, is the notion that there might be (effectively) an unlimited number of people willing to be homeless in

by rsync 8y ago

One thing I haven't heard discussed, and would like to, is the notion that there might be (effectively) an unlimited number of people willing to be homeless in California. Which is to say, you might be able to "solve" homeless problems in Denver or Salt Lake or St. Paul - and there have been some very interesting and encouraging policy moves there, especially in Salt Lake City. This might be because there are only so many people willing to be homeless in St. Paul. Or Green Bay or Denver - because of the cold and snow. What does it mean if the stream of homeless into SF/LA/SD is, effectively, unlimited ? How would that change our proposed solutions ?

protonimitate 8y ago
I think it's incredibly insensitive to assume that just because the weather is nice that people are fine being homeless. Homelessness is by and large a product of mental health issues, and a lack of a good mental health system. >only so many people willing to be homeless... right, because so much of the homeless population just needs to try harder. If this is how people really see the issue it's no wonder that its still an issue.
- tmpz22 8y ago
  How would you explain homelessness in countries with much better access to mental health services? Homelessness is a combination of issues like mental health services, housing prices, social safety nets, and much, much more. The real question scares people to even think about: what is the real price of ending the homeless epidemic and are we as a society actually willing to pay it? What if housing prices had to cut in half and taxes had to double? What if funding had to increase by 50x? What if 1:5 families had to accept a homeless person into their spare bedroom?
  - toasterlovin 8y ago
    > Homelessness is a combination of issues like mental health services, housing prices, social safety nets, and much, much more. The elephant in the room is drug use. Nobody wants to admit it, but most of the problems that the non-homeless experience with the homeless are related to drug use and mental health issues.
- LanceH 8y ago
  Then, apparently, nice weather causes mental health issues.
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  If I were homeless I definitely would move to CA or Florida to avoid the winter.
- conanbatt 8y ago
  I think it is an important concept to understand that the state of california cant reasonably fix this. If san francisco opened a state mental hospital for its homeless population, then all california counties would send people to them. And if california did, then all states would. Mental health does need some sort of federal solution.
  - xienze 8y ago
    > If san francisco opened a state mental hospital for its homeless population, then all california counties would send people to them Well, why not take that first step? I see the "we need more mental hospitals" solution trotted out over and over again but it seems that these cities spend a fortune doing everything for the homeless _but_ tackle mental health. Is your concern really that creating mental hospitals would attract too many homeless, moreso than the current policy of providing free drug paraphernalia, safe places to do drugs, lax drug law enforcement, lax attitudes towards panhandling, shelter, good weather, etc.?
    - conanbatt 8y ago
      That the cost of a single mental patient can rack up tens of thousands of dollars a month. Multiply by 10k homeless, you get a fiscal hole, and then you might end up with more nominal homeless on the streets because they are sent to the facilty that cant take them.
- kornish 8y ago
  I think that's an uncharitable interpretation. The tradeoff isn't between homelessness and not-homelessness, it's between being homeless in Denver and being homeless in SF. There are cities which literally put their homeless on a bus to the Bay Area [0]. [0]: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2017/dec/20/bussed-out-america-moves-homeless-people-country-study https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2017/dec/...
- rsync 8y ago
  You have misunderstood my comment. I am saying that to whatever degree someone is already homeless, they may be less willing to stay somewhere with life threatening weather than somewhere without it. I agree with you that these people are mentally ill. "right, because so much of the homeless population just needs to try harder" I never said that, or anything that implied that.
- eanzenberg 8y ago
  Its not about the weather but about the liberalism found in CA coastal cities (Santa Cruz has the highest homelessness per resident). This means more willingness to give to panhandlers which invites more to the area.
- eindiran 8y ago
  Very few people are "fine" being homeless anywhere and I don't think this is what OP was trying to say. But if you're choosing between being homeless in Chicago and being homeless in LA or San Francisco, one of the options is much more attractive. There's a reason that newspapers in San Francisco don't have to report the number of people who froze to death each winter, which absolutely happens each year in Chicago.
- segmondy 8y ago
  I spoke to a homeless guy I often saw around many years ago as we were approaching winter in Michigan. I asked how he fares during the winter. He laughs and tells me that they mostly migrate South or West. That's right! They head to Florida or California. I still tipped him and sure enough I didn't see him winter time but he was back around June.
- briandear 8y ago
  So why does San Francisco have more homeless than Houston?
  - hcknwscommenter 8y ago
    because Houston is intolerably hot and the mosquitoes will eat you alive.
hindsightbias 8y ago
There are many studies, but one I read farther back said about ~50% of SF homeless had lived here more than 10 years and most (70 or 75%) had lived in homes before. Which seems logical thinking about 2007 rent pricing. So yes, there's a significant crowd that will move here for the services/weather/won't get harrassed by PD, but there's also probably a larger crowd of people just hanging on who are getting squeezed out of their apartments over time.
- toasterlovin 8y ago
  That they lived in homes before does not mean that increased housing costs are why they are now homeless.
  - s73v3r_ 8y ago
    No, but for a lot of them, you'd be hard pressed to show that they weren't a contributing factor.
    - toasterlovin 8y ago
      I'm skeptical. Growing up in Los Angeles, I basically never saw Central American immigrants living on the streets. As members of the very lowest rungs of the lower class, these are the people you would expect to see living on the streets if housing costs were the driving force behind homelessness.
      - hindsightbias 8y ago
        Back in the day (before the housing bust) a tour of Mission or Sunset real estate listings would contain "unpermitted structure in back yard" (not basement). They weren't storage sheds, they were housing with a/c units in the window. Bunk beds or cots in them. A lot of their work dried up after the housing bust. It was also one thing to house the non-resident (and non-rent controlled) worker cooking at the neighborhood restaurant or working construction vs what we think of as indigent street homeless. Many of those units are still there, but today's owners are probably less open someone in their back yard. There's also a trait in some cultures of taking care of their own and multiple families living together. My neighbor told me my predecessors were 6-7 FOB Irish youth, bunk beds in the living room. [edit - link below]
joshe 8y ago
The highest estimate I can find is 1.5 million homeless in the United States, those who use some shelter during a year. The total number of chronic homeless seems to be 150,000 in the US. [1] The bay area has a population of 7 million people. Just as a thought experiment, we could easily double that population by moving to SF Mission style density in more parts of the bay area. That is 3-4 story wood frame houses with first floor retail and parks. This would house all of America's homeless, and another 5 million people as well. The physical/engineering/resources part of housing aren't the constraint. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_the_United_States#Total_number https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_the_United_Sta...
- alexandercrohde 8y ago
  In SF the homeless problem that I perceived was individuals living on the main street, sleeping on boxes, smelling of alcohol, only partially dressed, walking through traffic, screaming randomly (schizophrenia?), or setting up tents in Soma. I have no doubt these problem-individuals are absolutely unemployable. I'm not sure how building more million-dollar houses relates to fixing the homelessness problem. Is somebody debating giving million-dollar houses to the homeless?
  - hcknwscommenter 8y ago
    Mark Leno, London Breed, Jane Kim, and Angela Alioto each propose an approach to "homelessness" and an approach to "insane rents/house prices." They are separate issues. No one of any consequence is debating giving million-dollar houses to the homeless.
eanzenberg 8y ago
It means liberal coastal CA cities will continue to subsidize a national-level epidemic.
jeffreyrogers 8y ago
Salt Lake City's homeless population has gone up dramatically recently. In part because homeless people have heard how good the resources are here and are coming in from other cities faster than they can be taken care of. But that actually supports your point that there might be more people willing to be homeless in certain areas than can be adequately taken care of.
GuiA 8y ago
Very few homeless people were born homeless. If the stream is unlimited, where are they coming from?
pcwalton 8y ago
This is discussed all the time. The reality is that 71% of the homeless in SF were former residents of the city: http://sfist.com/2016/02/11/71_of_sf_homeless_once_had_homes_in.php http://sfist.com/2016/02/11/71_of_sf_homeless_once_had_homes...
- dmode 8y ago
  This is a very misleading stat and often repeated by SF leaders to divert tax money to the problem. The way the question is structured is that "where were you living before being homeless" and the answer would almost 100% be SF. Because you move to SF and may be spend a month in SRO and become homeless.
maerF0x0 8y ago
If you open it up to further ideas like sanctuary cities (from immigration law) and reduce all barriers to entry, then yes there is probably an unsatisfiable number of people looking to live in the bay area. The weather is nice, the jobs pay well (and employers demand you be here, not remote), there is great food and beautiful places to be.
- dmode 8y ago
  Almost 100% of homeless are Americans.

by rsync 8y ago

protonimitate 8y ago

I think it's incredibly insensitive to assume that just because the weather is nice that people are fine being homeless. Homelessness is by and large a product of mental health issues, and a lack of a good mental health system. >only so many people willing to be homeless... right, because so much of the homeless population just needs to try harder. If this is how people really see the issue it's no wonder that its still an issue.

tmpz22 8y ago
How would you explain homelessness in countries with much better access to mental health services? Homelessness is a combination of issues like mental health services, housing prices, social safety nets, and much, much more. The real question scares people to even think about: what is the real price of ending the homeless epidemic and are we as a society actually willing to pay it? What if housing prices had to cut in half and taxes had to double? What if funding had to increase by 50x? What if 1:5 families had to accept a homeless person into their spare bedroom?
- toasterlovin 8y ago
  > Homelessness is a combination of issues like mental health services, housing prices, social safety nets, and much, much more. The elephant in the room is drug use. Nobody wants to admit it, but most of the problems that the non-homeless experience with the homeless are related to drug use and mental health issues.
LanceH 8y ago
Then, apparently, nice weather causes mental health issues.
maxxxxx 8y ago
If I were homeless I definitely would move to CA or Florida to avoid the winter.
conanbatt 8y ago
I think it is an important concept to understand that the state of california cant reasonably fix this. If san francisco opened a state mental hospital for its homeless population, then all california counties would send people to them. And if california did, then all states would. Mental health does need some sort of federal solution.
- xienze 8y ago
  > If san francisco opened a state mental hospital for its homeless population, then all california counties would send people to them Well, why not take that first step? I see the "we need more mental hospitals" solution trotted out over and over again but it seems that these cities spend a fortune doing everything for the homeless _but_ tackle mental health. Is your concern really that creating mental hospitals would attract too many homeless, moreso than the current policy of providing free drug paraphernalia, safe places to do drugs, lax drug law enforcement, lax attitudes towards panhandling, shelter, good weather, etc.?
  - conanbatt 8y ago
    That the cost of a single mental patient can rack up tens of thousands of dollars a month. Multiply by 10k homeless, you get a fiscal hole, and then you might end up with more nominal homeless on the streets because they are sent to the facilty that cant take them.
kornish 8y ago
I think that's an uncharitable interpretation. The tradeoff isn't between homelessness and not-homelessness, it's between being homeless in Denver and being homeless in SF. There are cities which literally put their homeless on a bus to the Bay Area [0]. [0]: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2017/dec/20/bussed-out-america-moves-homeless-people-country-study https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2017/dec/...
rsync 8y ago
You have misunderstood my comment. I am saying that to whatever degree someone is already homeless, they may be less willing to stay somewhere with life threatening weather than somewhere without it. I agree with you that these people are mentally ill. "right, because so much of the homeless population just needs to try harder" I never said that, or anything that implied that.
eanzenberg 8y ago
Its not about the weather but about the liberalism found in CA coastal cities (Santa Cruz has the highest homelessness per resident). This means more willingness to give to panhandlers which invites more to the area.
eindiran 8y ago
Very few people are "fine" being homeless anywhere and I don't think this is what OP was trying to say. But if you're choosing between being homeless in Chicago and being homeless in LA or San Francisco, one of the options is much more attractive. There's a reason that newspapers in San Francisco don't have to report the number of people who froze to death each winter, which absolutely happens each year in Chicago.
segmondy 8y ago
I spoke to a homeless guy I often saw around many years ago as we were approaching winter in Michigan. I asked how he fares during the winter. He laughs and tells me that they mostly migrate South or West. That's right! They head to Florida or California. I still tipped him and sure enough I didn't see him winter time but he was back around June.
briandear 8y ago
So why does San Francisco have more homeless than Houston?
- hcknwscommenter 8y ago
  because Houston is intolerably hot and the mosquitoes will eat you alive.

hindsightbias 8y ago

There are many studies, but one I read farther back said about ~50% of SF homeless had lived here more than 10 years and most (70 or 75%) had lived in homes before. Which seems logical thinking about 2007 rent pricing. So yes, there's a significant crowd that will move here for the services/weather/won't get harrassed by PD, but there's also probably a larger crowd of people just hanging on who are getting squeezed out of their apartments over time.

toasterlovin 8y ago
That they lived in homes before does not mean that increased housing costs are why they are now homeless.
- s73v3r_ 8y ago
  No, but for a lot of them, you'd be hard pressed to show that they weren't a contributing factor.
  - toasterlovin 8y ago
    I'm skeptical. Growing up in Los Angeles, I basically never saw Central American immigrants living on the streets. As members of the very lowest rungs of the lower class, these are the people you would expect to see living on the streets if housing costs were the driving force behind homelessness.
    - hindsightbias 8y ago
      Back in the day (before the housing bust) a tour of Mission or Sunset real estate listings would contain "unpermitted structure in back yard" (not basement). They weren't storage sheds, they were housing with a/c units in the window. Bunk beds or cots in them. A lot of their work dried up after the housing bust. It was also one thing to house the non-resident (and non-rent controlled) worker cooking at the neighborhood restaurant or working construction vs what we think of as indigent street homeless. Many of those units are still there, but today's owners are probably less open someone in their back yard. There's also a trait in some cultures of taking care of their own and multiple families living together. My neighbor told me my predecessors were 6-7 FOB Irish youth, bunk beds in the living room. [edit - link below]

joshe 8y ago

The highest estimate I can find is 1.5 million homeless in the United States, those who use some shelter during a year. The total number of chronic homeless seems to be 150,000 in the US. [1] The bay area has a population of 7 million people. Just as a thought experiment, we could easily double that population by moving to SF Mission style density in more parts of the bay area. That is 3-4 story wood frame houses with first floor retail and parks. This would house all of America's homeless, and another 5 million people as well. The physical/engineering/resources part of housing aren't the constraint. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_the_United_States#Total_number https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_the_United_Sta...

alexandercrohde 8y ago
In SF the homeless problem that I perceived was individuals living on the main street, sleeping on boxes, smelling of alcohol, only partially dressed, walking through traffic, screaming randomly (schizophrenia?), or setting up tents in Soma. I have no doubt these problem-individuals are absolutely unemployable. I'm not sure how building more million-dollar houses relates to fixing the homelessness problem. Is somebody debating giving million-dollar houses to the homeless?
- hcknwscommenter 8y ago
  Mark Leno, London Breed, Jane Kim, and Angela Alioto each propose an approach to "homelessness" and an approach to "insane rents/house prices." They are separate issues. No one of any consequence is debating giving million-dollar houses to the homeless.

eanzenberg 8y ago

It means liberal coastal CA cities will continue to subsidize a national-level epidemic.

jeffreyrogers 8y ago

Salt Lake City's homeless population has gone up dramatically recently. In part because homeless people have heard how good the resources are here and are coming in from other cities faster than they can be taken care of. But that actually supports your point that there might be more people willing to be homeless in certain areas than can be adequately taken care of.

GuiA 8y ago

Very few homeless people were born homeless. If the stream is unlimited, where are they coming from?

pcwalton 8y ago

This is discussed all the time. The reality is that 71% of the homeless in SF were former residents of the city: http://sfist.com/2016/02/11/71_of_sf_homeless_once_had_homes_in.php http://sfist.com/2016/02/11/71_of_sf_homeless_once_had_homes...

dmode 8y ago
This is a very misleading stat and often repeated by SF leaders to divert tax money to the problem. The way the question is structured is that "where were you living before being homeless" and the answer would almost 100% be SF. Because you move to SF and may be spend a month in SRO and become homeless.

maerF0x0 8y ago

If you open it up to further ideas like sanctuary cities (from immigration law) and reduce all barriers to entry, then yes there is probably an unsatisfiable number of people looking to live in the bay area. The weather is nice, the jobs pay well (and employers demand you be here, not remote), there is great food and beautiful places to be.

dmode 8y ago
Almost 100% of homeless are Americans.