Item — HN Reader

Not really... the homeless by choice types are tweakers who move to SF to intentionally live on the streets and have easy access to cheap and plentiful drugs. SF basically created hamsterdam, and addicts from all over the country flock here so they can get high and enjoy life on the streets with impunity.

The street denizens in SF building encampments, shitting on the sidewalk, breaking into cars to get their fix and blatantly operating chop shops aren't hard up people who are just down on their luck and between jobs... these types move here to specifically live on the streets and get high all the time.

3 comments

Yes. We need a two part solution. For the first part, the city should offer all the medical (mental and physical) care they could want, as well as any help they may need to get off the street. For the other part, the city needs to arrest and prosecute those who do are clearly mentally stable and just enjoying a drug filled vagabond life on the city streets.

What about individuals who prefer tent dwelling and regular work (paid and volunteer) but eschew both illegal drug use and unemployment?

I have a tent I could call a home but am not entirely comfortable crashing wherever I can, although generally I like being outside as much as possible. Tent dwelling is also historically well-respected, hard housing being the niche of farmers and royalty. I'd go as far to say that if people in tents aren't safe it's not a good neighborhood, because tents are fragile. They're also not garbage: some of them are fireproof and UV resistant with two or three shells. And, if you've never built housing, I can tell you: it is a huge chore for hundreds of people, including chemical workers, lumberjacks, metalworkers, and coal miners.

Why not build a Black Rock City where the Burn never stops? If cities sponsored that niche, the gig economy would ramp up to "unstoppable machine" instantly. Sociologically, there's not much difference between a tent city at a festival and an apartment building with a range of incomes, in terms of deviancy and community struggles. From a housing and urban development perspective, some of the new textiles are better and more sustainable than industrial construction.

> Why not build a Black Rock City where the Burn never stops?

You know, that would actually be a fascinating thing to see. I doubt it will ever happen given how litigious our society is, but that seems preferable to what we're doing now. San Francisco spends about $250 million on homeless services[1], but you'd never know from walking around. You could probably fund a non-stop Burn with that; the budget for a 65,000 person burn for a week is 37 million[2]. You'd have fewer people and less overhead so I think it would work.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_the_San_Franci...

[2] https://burningman.org/expenses/expenses-2016/

San Jose had one of sorts, iirc it was destroyed because it was a hotbed of assaults, drugs, rapes, and pollution (illegal fires and dumping).

How coordinated was it though? I also think part of the solution is to provide something more appealing to the mentally ill homeless and the lifestyle-homeless. There is a lot of space an hour or two from most major cities that could be used in a project like this.

Something of a commune, heavily staffed with mental health professionals and with very attentive services (medical, cleaning, garbage). Encourage the more willing to undertake/share those roles. Make it feel somewhat self-organised and free.

Run a very loose "street school" - open-air where possible, 1-2 hours a day, variety of interesting topics. (I'm surprised they don't try doing that in SF.)

"The Jungle". Over 618 tons of trash (not counting hazardous waste) were removed upon its closure.

http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-silicon-valley...

  Why not build a Black Rock City

Burners are mandated to be self-sufficient and leave no trace; only chemical toilets are provided. If that ethic was practiced by this population, there would be many more options.

70% of homeless in SF were previously housed in SF at one point. Citation needed for your narrative.

Source: hsh.sfgov.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/2007-SF-PIT-Report.pdf.

It’s amazing that in a such a demonstrably corrupt and unequal society as America in 2018, that people cling to these insane narratives about the most vulnerable people in society.

I guess if you’re going to side with the rich in this ongoing class war, this is the kind of stuff you have to tell yourself to sleep at night.

Do you live in San Francisco? His narrative is far closer to reality than yours.

No it isn't. 70% of homeless in SF were previously housed in SF at one point. Citation needed for your narrative.

Source: hsh.sfgov.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/2007-SF-PIT-Report.pdf.