3 ms·

The current budget is $300 million per year for homeless relief in SF. There's approximately 8000 homless in SF. 300000000 / 8000 => $37,500 per individual per

by dymk 8y ago

The current budget is $300 million per year for homeless relief in SF. There's approximately 8000 homless in SF. 300000000 / 8000 => $37,500 per individual per year. How is the problem getting so much worse with almost $40k per year being spent on each individual homeless person? Where is that money going? How are these programs so inefficient that $40k spent on bulk relief is ineffective? Why does anyone think that just increasing that number per person is going to solve anything, without a detailed plan about how to spend it? Given the above, it's entirely rational to oppose Prop C, which doesn't provide details, transparency, or accountability about how the money will be spent.

refurb 8y ago
It’s been stated a few times on HN, and I think it’s a fair argument that you should be looking at all the people that are not only homeless, but also those housed (I.e. those receiving assistance). That said, SF’s budget is one of the largest of any city in the US. I think i read that Pittsburgh (which is also a city + county) has a per capita budget less than half of SF’s. Last I checked Pittsburgh wasn’t a wasteland, so where is all that extra money going?
- bsder 8y ago
  > Last I checked Pittsburgh wasn’t a wasteland, so where is all that extra money going? Pittsburgh has a self-correcting mechanism around homelessness that San Francisco does not have. It's called "winter". A significant cold snap results in a lot of unfortunate deaths in the homeless.
  - refurb 8y ago
    I was commenting beyond the homeless problem. Why does it cost SF twice as much per capita to run this city?
    - dragonwriter 8y ago
      Local labor and real property costs.
      - dymk 8y ago
        What does "real property costs" mean when we're talking about the city government, who are the ones that have the most say in deciding where, when, and at what cost to build bulk low-income housing?
        dragonwriter 8y ago
        > What does "real property costs" mean when we're talking about the city government, Roughly the same as it means for everyone else, because of the last clause of the 5th Amendment. > who are the ones that have the most say in deciding where, when, and at what cost to build bulk low-income housing? The question was about running he city, not building low income housing, but in either case the labor and real estate prices in the area party a significant role.
      - refurb 8y ago
        I don’t think labor costs would double a cities budget. And how much real property does the city buy in a given year?
jaggederest 8y ago
Many of the most severe users of multiple systems are astronomically expensive. Almost $100k/yr per person. It's emergency room visits that aren't paid for, ambulance time, nurses, doctors, surgery, helicopter rides to trauma centers, everything. It's not effective because it doesn't address any of the root problems. It just patches the person up and sends them out again, until they have another heart attack or psychotic break and end up running up another hospital bill. http://www.counties.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/pdf_distribute_hums_overview_2014_rev_110514.pdf http://www.counties.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/pd... Blatant plug: The folks at RideAlong are trying to solve these problems and they're hiring. I had a chance to work with them very briefly and they are really engaged and committed to solving these kinds of problems. YC alums too. https://getridealong.com/about-us/ https://getridealong.com/about-us/
- dymk 8y ago
  According to your link, the top 1% of relief beneficiaries consume 25% of relief budget. 511 people consumed $50 million (in 2014). That number is absolutely jaw dropping to me. I expected it to be a skewed distribution, but that amount is just truly incredible. It's a testament to how inefficient the current system is at helping those who need serious help, and should be a wake-up call to those who think throwing more money at the problem will actually fix anything.
- theptip 8y ago
  Is that report actually referring to homeless? Looks like just "high users of multiple systems", which could include someone who has accommodation (e.g. family member's house) but is bankrupted by healthcare costs.
  - jaggederest 8y ago
    They're largely homeless, from what I know, and virtually all don't have what I'd consider secure housing, depending on how you define that, but yeah, you're right.
theptip 8y ago
An interesting position here: https://www.npr.org/2015/12/10/459100751/utah-reduced-chronic-homelessness-by-91-percent-heres-how https://www.npr.org/2015/12/10/459100751/utah-reduced-chroni... Not sure how applicable this is to SF, but the estimate there was that $30-50k/year was being spent on service usage for homeless people, which is the same ballpark as here (assuming the current budget actually includes e.g. medical costs).

by dymk 8y ago

refurb 8y ago

It’s been stated a few times on HN, and I think it’s a fair argument that you should be looking at all the people that are not only homeless, but also those housed (I.e. those receiving assistance). That said, SF’s budget is one of the largest of any city in the US. I think i read that Pittsburgh (which is also a city + county) has a per capita budget less than half of SF’s. Last I checked Pittsburgh wasn’t a wasteland, so where is all that extra money going?

bsder 8y ago
> Last I checked Pittsburgh wasn’t a wasteland, so where is all that extra money going? Pittsburgh has a self-correcting mechanism around homelessness that San Francisco does not have. It's called "winter". A significant cold snap results in a lot of unfortunate deaths in the homeless.
- refurb 8y ago
  I was commenting beyond the homeless problem. Why does it cost SF twice as much per capita to run this city?
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    Local labor and real property costs.
    - dymk 8y ago
      What does "real property costs" mean when we're talking about the city government, who are the ones that have the most say in deciding where, when, and at what cost to build bulk low-income housing?
      - dragonwriter 8y ago
        > What does "real property costs" mean when we're talking about the city government, Roughly the same as it means for everyone else, because of the last clause of the 5th Amendment. > who are the ones that have the most say in deciding where, when, and at what cost to build bulk low-income housing? The question was about running he city, not building low income housing, but in either case the labor and real estate prices in the area party a significant role.
    - refurb 8y ago
      I don’t think labor costs would double a cities budget. And how much real property does the city buy in a given year?

jaggederest 8y ago

Many of the most severe users of multiple systems are astronomically expensive. Almost $100k/yr per person. It's emergency room visits that aren't paid for, ambulance time, nurses, doctors, surgery, helicopter rides to trauma centers, everything. It's not effective because it doesn't address any of the root problems. It just patches the person up and sends them out again, until they have another heart attack or psychotic break and end up running up another hospital bill. http://www.counties.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/pdf_distribute_hums_overview_2014_rev_110514.pdf http://www.counties.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/pd... Blatant plug: The folks at RideAlong are trying to solve these problems and they're hiring. I had a chance to work with them very briefly and they are really engaged and committed to solving these kinds of problems. YC alums too. https://getridealong.com/about-us/ https://getridealong.com/about-us/

dymk 8y ago
According to your link, the top 1% of relief beneficiaries consume 25% of relief budget. 511 people consumed $50 million (in 2014). That number is absolutely jaw dropping to me. I expected it to be a skewed distribution, but that amount is just truly incredible. It's a testament to how inefficient the current system is at helping those who need serious help, and should be a wake-up call to those who think throwing more money at the problem will actually fix anything.
theptip 8y ago
Is that report actually referring to homeless? Looks like just "high users of multiple systems", which could include someone who has accommodation (e.g. family member's house) but is bankrupted by healthcare costs.
- jaggederest 8y ago
  They're largely homeless, from what I know, and virtually all don't have what I'd consider secure housing, depending on how you define that, but yeah, you're right.

theptip 8y ago

An interesting position here: https://www.npr.org/2015/12/10/459100751/utah-reduced-chronic-homelessness-by-91-percent-heres-how https://www.npr.org/2015/12/10/459100751/utah-reduced-chroni... Not sure how applicable this is to SF, but the estimate there was that $30-50k/year was being spent on service usage for homeless people, which is the same ballpark as here (assuming the current budget actually includes e.g. medical costs).