All organisms or systems that can grow have limits. In biology, this is typically either the ability to eat or the ability to eliminate waste. A city will alw

All organisms or systems that can grow have limits. In biology, this is typically either the ability to eat or the ability to eliminate waste. A city will always reach a limit. It could be water, transportation infrastructure, economically viable activities given the location, etc, or if you are lucky as a result of the location being desirable, physical space. You can't build your way out of the San Francisco affordability issue even if you (for example) double the aid per homeless person and double the free housing. There is an error in the common thinking about the homeless problem in San Francisco. San Francisco has a homeless problem because it's affluent and provides services, not despite being affluent and providing services. If San Francisco wanted to provide assisted living for members of society that can't support themselves, it would get the most bang for it's buck to provide food, shelter, clean bathrooms, trash services, electricity, and wifi in other willing cities in California. You could build a range of accommodations and shelters, all the way from campsites to cabins to resorts, and you could get user feedback from the residents to determine which operators to expand with and which facilities to shut down. The idea of trying to build your way out of homeless problem in the most expensive and physically constrained city in California is madness. That's just enriching the interests that have become the San Francisco homeless industrial complex. Article: "S.F. pays $61,000 a year for one tent in a site to shelter the homeless. Why?" https://www.sfchronicle.com/local/article/S-F-pays-61-000-a-year-for-one-tent-to-house-16001074.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/local/article/S-F-pays-61-000-a-...