6 ms·

I've been all over the US, and I recently visited SF for the first time on a work trip. Never seen such a desolate place, and I say this as someone who has bee

I've been all over the US, and I recently visited SF for the first time on a work trip. Never seen such a desolate place, and I say this as someone who has been homeless before and slept in homeless shelters. Homeless shelters in Boulder, CO were about x10 less sketchy than the streets I walked around in downtown SF. I'm not sure where we were exactly, but there was homeless shooting up in the street at least once every few blocks, plus garbage everywhere and human waste. What the absolute fuck is going on down there

yodsanklai 4y ago
Is the problem addressed in some way? or people have concluded that there were no solutions?
- the_mitsuhiko 4y ago
  I think it hit a low point during and just after 2020. I would guess it's slightly better now just based on my few visits there. For sure there is a ton of daily cleaning going on now on the side walks which helps just lifting up the entire perception of the street. It was smelling of urine constantly, now it's not nearly as bad any more.
- twblalock 4y ago
  The mayor finally snapped and realized that things need to change, but every attempt to improve the situation is opposed by some interest group or group of residents who still hold on to the same bad set of policies that let the problem get so bad in the first place.
  - fosk 4y ago
    When you have more than a billion dollar spent every year on homelessness, do they really want homelessness to end? Think about it. They call it “homeless industrial complex” for a reason.
    - polynomial 4y ago
      Would be interested what that number is just for SF. (Assuming $1B is national expenditure.)
      - jdminhbg 4y ago
        Heh, no, the $1B is for SF: https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/S-F-has-an-unprecedented-1-1-billion-to-spend-16318448.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/S-F-has-an-unpre...
      - Swizec 4y ago
        I once heard the city spends around $50k/year per homeless person. The latest estimate for 2022 is 7,754 people experiencing homelessness in San Francisco – https://sfgov.org/scorecards/safety-net/homeless-population https://sfgov.org/scorecards/safety-net/homeless-population That gives an estimate of $390,000,000/year spent on homelessness in San Francisco alone. Mind you the official definition of “homeless” is a lot stricter than people assume. Living in a car makes you not-homeless. Here’s a good podcast episode about that: https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/according-to-need-chapter-2-the-homelessness-hotline/transcript/ https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/according-to-need-cha... My first question whenever thinking about these numbers is: If we just give them that money, will they stay homeless? I bet many would be more than able to get their life in order, if you gave them 50k … that’s more than minimum wage for SF.
        twblalock 4y ago
        I bet almost all of them be be homeless again within a year. The problems that made them homeless in the first place are not just money problems.
        Swizec 4y ago
        I think that’s where social workers (I think?) draw the distinction between chronically homeless and someone experiencing homelessness. The average person who experiences homelessness stays homeless for 237 days[1]. That’s the highest estimate I could find on google. Some were as low as 90 day average. I bet a lot of those people could fix the problem a lot faster, if you gave them minimum wage money for a year. [1] https://embed.clearimpact.com/Measure/Embed?id=100076098 https://embed.clearimpact.com/Measure/Embed?id=100076098
pronlover723 4y ago
I'll take the hits. It's lefty paradise. The city is 85% democrat and has the highest per capita tax revenue of any city in the USA. In other words they have the most money to solve problems via the government which is generally what the left thinks is good. The policies the city choose via its democrat leadership arguably lead to exactly what the city is. ps: this post does not mean I'm on the right or that the right has all the solutions. But I do tend to think many left solutions are counter productive and I think SF is good example of unintended consequences.
- mc32 4y ago
  Some of the blame lies with the system of non-profits and perverse incentives (if they solve the problem they cease to exist and their upper management and other grifters lose their cushy jobs), so they devise solutions that seem plausible yet never produce results for the target population, except again for the upper management and system.
  - wahern 4y ago
    > devise solutions that seem plausible But there are mountains of evidence! (In the form of an endless stream of low-quality sociology studies.)
- jmyeet 4y ago
  > It's lefty paradise. Ok, let's get into some definitions and corrections. SF isn't a lefty paradise. It's a liberal paradise. "Liberal" has pretty much become synonymous with "neoliberal". And by "liberal" i include the vast majority of Democrat and Republican voters (certainly as neoliberals). Liberalism is really about aesthetics and is performative, like how racism famously ended when we elected a black president or misogyny ended when we appointed a female Supreme Court justice. The primary differentiating factor between Democrat and Republican voters are social issues but here's why it's aesthetic/performative. Democrats might tend to self-identify as being against racism but, as you see in the Bay Area, will tend to adamanatly oppose any effort to build more or cheaper housing. The entire political spectrum in US politics still works at the behest of corporate interests, first and foremost. My point here is that you cannot separate economic from social policy, which is why such labels as "fiscally conservative, socially liberal" are fundamentally flawed. If SF were truly a "lefty paradise", it would attack the core issue of homelessness and poverty (and the resulting crime), which is housing. But instead, you have superficial/aesthetic policies aimed at reducing the appearance of homelessness (eg clearing out homeless encampments). There is no meaningful "lefty" or "leftist" movement anywhere in the United States. What many people label as "lefty" or "liberal" anywhere else in the world would be labelled as "center right" politics.
DoreenMichele 4y ago
One factor: Temperate weather and relatively little rainfall.
hindsightbias 4y ago
I just returned from one of the most tony neighborhoods in TX. In the last week, my niece had hide in a restaraunt kitchen after a carjacking gun battle broke out front, a store was mob raided, and she had to call the cops to a posh hotel where a woman was being beaten in the parking lot while the valets watched.

yodsanklai 4y ago

Is the problem addressed in some way? or people have concluded that there were no solutions?

the_mitsuhiko 4y ago
I think it hit a low point during and just after 2020. I would guess it's slightly better now just based on my few visits there. For sure there is a ton of daily cleaning going on now on the side walks which helps just lifting up the entire perception of the street. It was smelling of urine constantly, now it's not nearly as bad any more.
twblalock 4y ago
The mayor finally snapped and realized that things need to change, but every attempt to improve the situation is opposed by some interest group or group of residents who still hold on to the same bad set of policies that let the problem get so bad in the first place.
- fosk 4y ago
  When you have more than a billion dollar spent every year on homelessness, do they really want homelessness to end? Think about it. They call it “homeless industrial complex” for a reason.
  - polynomial 4y ago
    Would be interested what that number is just for SF. (Assuming $1B is national expenditure.)
    - jdminhbg 4y ago
      Heh, no, the $1B is for SF: https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/S-F-has-an-unprecedented-1-1-billion-to-spend-16318448.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/S-F-has-an-unpre...
    - Swizec 4y ago
      I once heard the city spends around $50k/year per homeless person. The latest estimate for 2022 is 7,754 people experiencing homelessness in San Francisco – https://sfgov.org/scorecards/safety-net/homeless-population https://sfgov.org/scorecards/safety-net/homeless-population That gives an estimate of $390,000,000/year spent on homelessness in San Francisco alone. Mind you the official definition of “homeless” is a lot stricter than people assume. Living in a car makes you not-homeless. Here’s a good podcast episode about that: https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/according-to-need-chapter-2-the-homelessness-hotline/transcript/ https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/according-to-need-cha... My first question whenever thinking about these numbers is: If we just give them that money, will they stay homeless? I bet many would be more than able to get their life in order, if you gave them 50k … that’s more than minimum wage for SF.
      - twblalock 4y ago
        I bet almost all of them be be homeless again within a year. The problems that made them homeless in the first place are not just money problems.
        Swizec 4y ago
        I think that’s where social workers (I think?) draw the distinction between chronically homeless and someone experiencing homelessness. The average person who experiences homelessness stays homeless for 237 days[1]. That’s the highest estimate I could find on google. Some were as low as 90 day average. I bet a lot of those people could fix the problem a lot faster, if you gave them minimum wage money for a year. [1] https://embed.clearimpact.com/Measure/Embed?id=100076098 https://embed.clearimpact.com/Measure/Embed?id=100076098

pronlover723 4y ago

I'll take the hits. It's lefty paradise. The city is 85% democrat and has the highest per capita tax revenue of any city in the USA. In other words they have the most money to solve problems via the government which is generally what the left thinks is good. The policies the city choose via its democrat leadership arguably lead to exactly what the city is. ps: this post does not mean I'm on the right or that the right has all the solutions. But I do tend to think many left solutions are counter productive and I think SF is good example of unintended consequences.

mc32 4y ago
Some of the blame lies with the system of non-profits and perverse incentives (if they solve the problem they cease to exist and their upper management and other grifters lose their cushy jobs), so they devise solutions that seem plausible yet never produce results for the target population, except again for the upper management and system.
- wahern 4y ago
  > devise solutions that seem plausible But there are mountains of evidence! (In the form of an endless stream of low-quality sociology studies.)
jmyeet 4y ago
> It's lefty paradise. Ok, let's get into some definitions and corrections. SF isn't a lefty paradise. It's a liberal paradise. "Liberal" has pretty much become synonymous with "neoliberal". And by "liberal" i include the vast majority of Democrat and Republican voters (certainly as neoliberals). Liberalism is really about aesthetics and is performative, like how racism famously ended when we elected a black president or misogyny ended when we appointed a female Supreme Court justice. The primary differentiating factor between Democrat and Republican voters are social issues but here's why it's aesthetic/performative. Democrats might tend to self-identify as being against racism but, as you see in the Bay Area, will tend to adamanatly oppose any effort to build more or cheaper housing. The entire political spectrum in US politics still works at the behest of corporate interests, first and foremost. My point here is that you cannot separate economic from social policy, which is why such labels as "fiscally conservative, socially liberal" are fundamentally flawed. If SF were truly a "lefty paradise", it would attack the core issue of homelessness and poverty (and the resulting crime), which is housing. But instead, you have superficial/aesthetic policies aimed at reducing the appearance of homelessness (eg clearing out homeless encampments). There is no meaningful "lefty" or "leftist" movement anywhere in the United States. What many people label as "lefty" or "liberal" anywhere else in the world would be labelled as "center right" politics.

DoreenMichele 4y ago

One factor: Temperate weather and relatively little rainfall.

hindsightbias 4y ago

I just returned from one of the most tony neighborhoods in TX. In the last week, my niece had hide in a restaraunt kitchen after a carjacking gun battle broke out front, a store was mob raided, and she had to call the cops to a posh hotel where a woman was being beaten in the parking lot while the valets watched.