> SF homeless budget is $300 million per year, yet there's only 5,000 to 10,000 homeless people. The fact that "there's only 5,000 to 10,000 homeless people" i

> SF homeless budget is $300 million per year, yet there's only 5,000 to 10,000 homeless people. The fact that "there's only 5,000 to 10,000 homeless people" is a direct consequence of this spending. From the Wikipedia entry on homelessness in SF: > much of this spending is focused on housing the formerly homeless, or those at risk, and not the currently homeless. You write: > And as I have said previously, can't 50% of the SF homeless be helped with job and interview skills to get them off the streets, so the other mentally ill 50% can get focus? It's amazing how the SF Chronicle can always find 5 homeless people to do a lucid interview with. Again, you're misrepresenting the situation. The homelessness budget is predominantly being used to stop people from falling through the cracks. Certainly you could spend more money on shelters. But it would only help the homeless if the money came via a budget increase.