5 ms·

> Instead, local money is now lavished on centrist and right-wing pressure groups — such as GrowSF, Abundant SF, Together SF, and Neighbors for a Better San Fra

> Instead, local money is now lavished on centrist and right-wing pressure groups — such as GrowSF, Abundant SF, Together SF, and Neighbors for a Better San Francisco — which have in the past four years fundraised over $50 million from conservative tech and real-estate elites. Probably notable that this happened because the left wing managed to fuck things up so badly in its management of the city. For example: * 8,323 homeless people in the city - https://www.sf.gov/data--homeless-population https://www.sf.gov/data--homeless-population * 846m homelessness budget for FY 2024-2025 - https://www.sf.gov/reports--september-2024--hsh-budget-fiscal-year-2024-2026 https://www.sf.gov/reports--september-2024--hsh-budget-fisca... So, a tiny bit over $100k USD per homeless person and they're still not all sheltered (you can see the sheltered vs unsheltered breakdown in the first link). That's an incredible amount of money to not house people. Of course, SF's famously anti-build-anything processes[1] and culture probably don't help when you're trying to provide housing, but ostensibly 'progressive' people are a big part of that unfortunately[2]. 1 - https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/state-report-slams-san-francisco-glacial-expensive-housing-permitting-process/ https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/state-report-slams... 2 - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0094119010000720 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00941...

transcriptase 2y ago
When solving a problem becomes a massive interconnected industry of NGOs who never have to show progress, and in fact get more funding the worse the problem gets, there’s little incentive to solve the problem. The rational and effective solutions are decried as “punitive conditionality”, “gatekeeping”, “pathologizing”, “institutional violence” etc. Much easier to pretend that doing more of the same ineffective things will magically start working someday and perpetually blame lack of funding.
skybrian 2y ago
Those last two links seem pretty old. I’m wondering how the politics behind building more housing has changed since then?
- TulliusCicero 2y ago
  Pretty old? The first one is less than two years old, it's October 2023.
  - skybrian 2y ago
    Yes, but there's been an election since then, along with pressure from the state government to build more housing.
Animats 2y ago
SF is built out. To build something, you have to tear down something first.
Aloisius 2y ago
> That's an incredible amount of money to not house people. Um. If they were housed, they wouldn't be included in the homeless count. Hence the problem using it as a denominator given all the money being spent subsidizing permanent housing for previously homeless people, rent subsidies for people at high risk for becoming homeless, etc. That and it is just the number of homeless (unsheltered or temporarily sheltered) on a particular day, not for the year. The homeless population isn't static.

transcriptase 2y ago

When solving a problem becomes a massive interconnected industry of NGOs who never have to show progress, and in fact get more funding the worse the problem gets, there’s little incentive to solve the problem. The rational and effective solutions are decried as “punitive conditionality”, “gatekeeping”, “pathologizing”, “institutional violence” etc. Much easier to pretend that doing more of the same ineffective things will magically start working someday and perpetually blame lack of funding.

skybrian 2y ago

Those last two links seem pretty old. I’m wondering how the politics behind building more housing has changed since then?

TulliusCicero 2y ago
Pretty old? The first one is less than two years old, it's October 2023.
- skybrian 2y ago
  Yes, but there's been an election since then, along with pressure from the state government to build more housing.

Animats 2y ago

SF is built out. To build something, you have to tear down something first.

Aloisius 2y ago

> That's an incredible amount of money to not house people. Um. If they were housed, they wouldn't be included in the homeless count. Hence the problem using it as a denominator given all the money being spent subsidizing permanent housing for previously homeless people, rent subsidies for people at high risk for becoming homeless, etc. That and it is just the number of homeless (unsheltered or temporarily sheltered) on a particular day, not for the year. The homeless population isn't static.