3 ms·

Cheap housing certainly allows social services to house severely drug addicted or mentally ill people more cost effectively, but that doesn’t solve the open air

Cheap housing certainly allows social services to house severely drug addicted or mentally ill people more cost effectively, but that doesn’t solve the open air drug dealing and psychosis you see in parts of San Francisco. Many of the people in those states publicly in SF have or had offers for shelter or housing available to them, which is part of why the scenes are concentrated near SRO districts. In other words, housing isn’t the only issue with San Francisco’s poor stewardship of the public realm.

davidw 4y ago
No one said it's a simple problem. What the book looks at, high level, is that high housing costs are what correlate most strongly with homelessness. West Virginia, for instance, has a huge opioid problem. And far lower rates of homelessness, because housing is cheap.
- shuckles 4y ago
  You’re missing the point. For many people, the endless petty crime, assaults by mentally ill people, open air drug abuse, and more are the issues to fix, and there isn’t much evidence giving impoverished people a shelter fixes that. WV and other poor regions have plenty of antisocial behavior, even if the antisocial are housed. Santa Clara County did a randomized assignment apartments for homeless study 2 years ago, and those housed used emergency services and died of drug overdose at the same, if not higher, rates than those who were not housed. Separately, all the antisocial people make living in subsidized housing awful. SROs are the most prolific evictors in San Francisco because their residents commonly have behavioral health issues or are outright criminals. So what problem does giving a homeless person a house actually solve?
  - bombcar 4y ago
    The problem of you seeing them. Out of sight, out of mind.
    - shuckles 4y ago
      Random assaults, petty crime, and cartel violence are not aesthetic issues and persist even if you house a homeless person. Thus the subsidized housing evictions. And while we’re being sanctimonious, neither are 600-800 overdose deaths a year.

davidw 4y ago

No one said it's a simple problem. What the book looks at, high level, is that high housing costs are what correlate most strongly with homelessness. West Virginia, for instance, has a huge opioid problem. And far lower rates of homelessness, because housing is cheap.

shuckles 4y ago
You’re missing the point. For many people, the endless petty crime, assaults by mentally ill people, open air drug abuse, and more are the issues to fix, and there isn’t much evidence giving impoverished people a shelter fixes that. WV and other poor regions have plenty of antisocial behavior, even if the antisocial are housed. Santa Clara County did a randomized assignment apartments for homeless study 2 years ago, and those housed used emergency services and died of drug overdose at the same, if not higher, rates than those who were not housed. Separately, all the antisocial people make living in subsidized housing awful. SROs are the most prolific evictors in San Francisco because their residents commonly have behavioral health issues or are outright criminals. So what problem does giving a homeless person a house actually solve?
- bombcar 4y ago
  The problem of you seeing them. Out of sight, out of mind.
  - shuckles 4y ago
    Random assaults, petty crime, and cartel violence are not aesthetic issues and persist even if you house a homeless person. Thus the subsidized housing evictions. And while we’re being sanctimonious, neither are 600-800 overdose deaths a year.