3 ms·

I ask this in good faith, since I don't live in the area: could you, reader come up with ways/legislation/policy to make the situation described in this article

I ask this in good faith, since I don't live in the area: could you, reader come up with ways/legislation/policy to make the situation described in this article worse? Take it from an engineering or project management stance: what could you possibly do to encourage the "negative" behaviors depicted here? How would you cause more chaos, more problems? Now, if you answered that, I ask you: why do you keep doing that?

zepto 5y ago
You say this as if there is much of a choice.
hereforphone 5y ago
[flagged]
bsder 5y ago
> Now, if you answered that, I ask you: why do you keep doing that? Because: money. Solving the SF homeless problems takes cash. 15% of the homeless have traumatic brain injury. Many more have other debilitating health problems. This means funding long term health care facilities--doctors, nurses, equipment, medicine--in cash. Not some "value of your home"--real taxes out of your pocket. At about $100K per year per patient and about 6000 patients--we're talking $600 million minimum. And long term medical care facilities at that funding level are regularly rated as unacceptable (the "solution" to the poor facilities in California was to simply close them and kick everybody out on to the street which is part of what caused this whole mess in the first place). Or you can do what everybody is implying with these articles: put all the visible homeless in prison where they won't disturb the property values. This, of course, neatly ignores the fact that the current "rash of property crimes" are mostly perpetrated by gangs and not the homeless.