3 ms·

SF does not solve the homeless problem, but there is good money to be made in the welfare-industrial complex pretending to help. Salt Lake City, that bastion o

by fmajid 3y ago

SF does not solve the homeless problem, but there is good money to be made in the welfare-industrial complex pretending to help. Salt Lake City, that bastion of left-liberalism (/s) does a much better job, specially at preventing vulnerable people from becoming homeless in the first place. Ultimately SF’s problems are well understood and the solutions as well, but there is no political will to confront the entrenched interests that led to this and an apathetic electorate that does not demand accountability is responsible.

adammarples 3y ago
The solutions to homelessness are well understood? What are they?
- pstuart 3y ago
  House the people. It's that simple. The hard part is finding affordable ways to do so. This is compounded by the fact that a large portion of the homeless suffer from mental health problems (my mother was in that boat). On the mental health front, we need to collectively find a way to institutionalize the mentally ill in a manner that is fair and humane. That should include indigent drug addicts who are unable to care for themselves.
  - gameman144 3y ago
    > House the people. It's that simple. It's not, though. Seattle ran into loads of problems with housing-first policies where the houses would get trashed and people with substance abuse problems would continue camping out as groups.
  - fmajid 3y ago
    Yes, the LPS Act of 1967 that left the mentally I’ll to their own devices was well-meaning but clearly written by people who no clue about the realities of mental illness.
- fmajid 3y ago
  1) remove NIMBYs’ ability to limit construction with procedural chicanery and keep housing prices high 2) Build subsidized housing. SF likes to complain about the end of the state redevelopment agencies but did you know that with just one year’s worth of the $7B a year windfall from the much-despised Tech (difference between the 2022 and 2008 budgets), SF could buy or build a $1M condo for every single of the 7,000 homeless men, women and children in the city? Instead at least half of that was captured by civil self-servants in the city bureaucracy in the form of salaries and benefits. 3) Restore involuntary committal of some mentally ill unable to care for themselves, that was abolished by the well-meaning but clueless Lanterman-Petris-Short Act in 1967 4) means-test rent-control (half of SF’s residential units), which creates haves and have-nots and raises prices to astronomic levels for new entrants 5) remove land-use restrictions like single-family zoning that covers half of the city 6) force drug addicts into treatment, using coercive measures if necessary
seanmcdirmid 3y ago
Salt Lake City is actually pretty liberal, not just by Utah standards. And the “SLC solved homelessness” was a last decade story that has already unraveled due to sustained and increased funding not being applied (again national problem, local solutions can’t do much).

by fmajid 3y ago

adammarples 3y ago

The solutions to homelessness are well understood? What are they?

pstuart 3y ago
House the people. It's that simple. The hard part is finding affordable ways to do so. This is compounded by the fact that a large portion of the homeless suffer from mental health problems (my mother was in that boat). On the mental health front, we need to collectively find a way to institutionalize the mentally ill in a manner that is fair and humane. That should include indigent drug addicts who are unable to care for themselves.
- gameman144 3y ago
  > House the people. It's that simple. It's not, though. Seattle ran into loads of problems with housing-first policies where the houses would get trashed and people with substance abuse problems would continue camping out as groups.
- fmajid 3y ago
  Yes, the LPS Act of 1967 that left the mentally I’ll to their own devices was well-meaning but clearly written by people who no clue about the realities of mental illness.
fmajid 3y ago
1) remove NIMBYs’ ability to limit construction with procedural chicanery and keep housing prices high 2) Build subsidized housing. SF likes to complain about the end of the state redevelopment agencies but did you know that with just one year’s worth of the $7B a year windfall from the much-despised Tech (difference between the 2022 and 2008 budgets), SF could buy or build a $1M condo for every single of the 7,000 homeless men, women and children in the city? Instead at least half of that was captured by civil self-servants in the city bureaucracy in the form of salaries and benefits. 3) Restore involuntary committal of some mentally ill unable to care for themselves, that was abolished by the well-meaning but clueless Lanterman-Petris-Short Act in 1967 4) means-test rent-control (half of SF’s residential units), which creates haves and have-nots and raises prices to astronomic levels for new entrants 5) remove land-use restrictions like single-family zoning that covers half of the city 6) force drug addicts into treatment, using coercive measures if necessary

seanmcdirmid 3y ago

Salt Lake City is actually pretty liberal, not just by Utah standards. And the “SLC solved homelessness” was a last decade story that has already unraveled due to sustained and increased funding not being applied (again national problem, local solutions can’t do much).