5 ms·

San Francisco spends over $40,000 per year on each homeless person in the city.

timeeater 6y ago
I think it could be an aspect that homeless people flock to places where there is spare money and climate that is easier to survive.
pksebben 6y ago
if this is true, why on earth wouldn't they just use that money to, I dunno, rent them an apartment?
- andi999 6y ago
  Probably the money is spend on admin. So if you take that to the homeless, admin would be unenployed. Unsolvable.
- nrp 6y ago
  They do. The majority of San Francisco’s budget around homelessness actually goes into keeping people housed, not to services for people who are unhoused. Mission Local has consistently interesting (though highly opinionated) reporting around this: https://missionlocal.org/2018/10/prop-c-in-liberal-san-francisco-government-leaders-fight-a-measure-to-fund-homeless-services-by-assailing-voters-confidence-in-the-very-concept-of-government/ https://missionlocal.org/2018/10/prop-c-in-liberal-san-franc...
  - jelliclesfarm 6y ago
    They could build high density apartments far away from San Francisco and run multiple shuttles for those working in the city. Homeless crisis and affordable home crisis will never be solved without robust transport networks. Yes, we can house a lot of people who need help. No, we can’t house them in San Francisco. Or in other expensive metros. As an aside, when prefab house builder from mare island offered to build units for the homeless, the unions protested and SF mayor, London Breed had to acquiesce to build them in the city and use Union labour only. So it was decided in 2014..maybe 2016..that after they find lots to build in SF, funds would go to build homeless units(not pre fab because Union labour was a condition). After that, the whole thing is hanging in limbo. Because..as if..there will be land in SF to build homes for the homeless. Daft..laughable if it weren’t so tragic.

I think it could be an aspect that homeless people flock to places where there is spare money and climate that is easier to survive.

pksebben 6y ago

if this is true, why on earth wouldn't they just use that money to, I dunno, rent them an apartment?

andi999 6y ago
Probably the money is spend on admin. So if you take that to the homeless, admin would be unenployed. Unsolvable.
nrp 6y ago
They do. The majority of San Francisco’s budget around homelessness actually goes into keeping people housed, not to services for people who are unhoused. Mission Local has consistently interesting (though highly opinionated) reporting around this: https://missionlocal.org/2018/10/prop-c-in-liberal-san-francisco-government-leaders-fight-a-measure-to-fund-homeless-services-by-assailing-voters-confidence-in-the-very-concept-of-government/ https://missionlocal.org/2018/10/prop-c-in-liberal-san-franc...
- jelliclesfarm 6y ago
  They could build high density apartments far away from San Francisco and run multiple shuttles for those working in the city. Homeless crisis and affordable home crisis will never be solved without robust transport networks. Yes, we can house a lot of people who need help. No, we can’t house them in San Francisco. Or in other expensive metros. As an aside, when prefab house builder from mare island offered to build units for the homeless, the unions protested and SF mayor, London Breed had to acquiesce to build them in the city and use Union labour only. So it was decided in 2014..maybe 2016..that after they find lots to build in SF, funds would go to build homeless units(not pre fab because Union labour was a condition). After that, the whole thing is hanging in limbo. Because..as if..there will be land in SF to build homes for the homeless. Daft..laughable if it weren’t so tragic.