sisco Subby?
the cisco kid frowns on your typo


/link-o caliente

How do you misspell the name of the city when it's in the first sentence of the article you're submitting? Jesus, I lose faith in humanity more and more everyday.

Solicites? Was he a Greek playwright or something?

At least subby got the whole "punctuation goes inside the quotation marks" thing right.

Pocket Ninja: At least subby got the whole "punctuation goes inside the quotation marks" thing right.

No, only half. The period should go outside in the first sentence.

/At least he didn't call it "Frisco"
//Subby still sucks

Do they count damn, dirty hippies as homeless even if they live in their vans?

It's been awhile since I've seen a headline that fails on so many levels. Congrats on the greenlight flubby.

Two Dogs Farking: No, only half. The period should go outside in the first sentence.

If I had that quizzical dog picture handy, I'd post it now.

Last time I was there I was more concerned about their home problem, to whit, did anyone in San Francisco have a home?

pandabear: Solicites? Was he a Greek playwright or something?

He would only philosophize if you paid him.

"the Homeless Services Coalition - has arrived from Los Angeles to stop pedestrians on the street, ask for money,"
Umm don't the homeless already do this.

For I am SOLICITES, god of panhandling, and I shall call San FranSISCO my new home!

SF is choking on homeless. It's like Calcutta.

Misspellings aside, headline fails because ANYONE who's EVER been to SF knows there's a homeless problem. Especially the people who live there.

Consider the last line FTFA:

And finally, if you really think the people of San Francisco need to be told that there is a homeless problem, you don't belong here.

Homeless people? In San Francisco? Well knock me down with a feather...I thought those were bums!

Two Dogs Farking: The period should go outside in the first sentence.

Nah, subby got that much right.

Well it's good to know things haven't changed much in San Francisco since the summer of '67.

The other day my liberal neighbors were teaching their little 8-year-old daughter to help the homeless. She asked me for a donation.

"That will be fine," I told her. "Wash my car, cut my grass, edge the lawn and trim the bushes, and I'll give you $50 to give to the homeless people begging on the corner."

The little girl gave me a funny look. "Why not just hire them to do the work instead?" she asked.

The parents accuse me of teaching their kid to think like a Republican, and have warned me never to come near their little daughter again.

I thought Solicites was the famous lawyer.

GIS for San Francisco Hippie:

Moral of the story: never give anything to people who come to you on your doorstep or the street asking you for money.

olddinosaur: The other day my liberal neighbors were teaching their little 8-year-old daughter to help the homeless. She asked me for a donation.

"That will be fine," I told her. "Wash my car, cut my grass, edge the lawn and trim the bushes, and I'll give you $50 to give to the homeless people begging on the corner."

The little girl gave me a funny look. "Why not just hire them to do the work instead?" she asked.

The parents accuse me of teaching their kid to think like a Republican, and have warned me never to come near their little daughter again.

Hey, I can make up on-the-spot anecdotes, too!

The other day, my liberal neighbors were teaching their little 8-year-son to help the gays. She asked me for a donation.

"That will be fine," I told her. "Clean my windows, trim the bushes, and I'll give you $60 to help the gays banging each other in the back alley."

The little boy have me a funny look. "Why not just hire them to do the work instead?" he asked.

The parents accuse me of teaching the kid to think like a Catholic priest, and have warned me to never come near their little boy again.

rotatingpies: Misspellings aside, headline fails because ANYONE who's EVER been to SF knows there's a homeless problem. Especially the people who live there.

This. And I don't know if the people there realize it or not, but it's precisely the city's hippie leftism that created the problem. When you give homeless people all kinds of special rights and benefits, you attract them from all over the country.

Midnight Rambler: pandabear: Solicites? Was he a Greek playwright or something?

He would only philosophize if you paid him.

Win.

Okay, "pocket ninja:"

The other day the neighbors, who are all a bunch of junkies, were teaching their little kid to pimp his ass to the queers, so they could get money for a shot of smack.

"Why don't you go murder a bunch of Jesus freaks instead," suggested helpfully, "then burn down their house and shoot all their children in the back?"

The parents have accused me of teaching their kid to think like an FBI agent, and have warned me never to go near their children again.

Your turn, "Ninja."

Ral: This. And I don't know if the people there realize it or not, but it's precisely the city's hippie leftism that created the problem. When you give homeless people all kinds of special rights and benefits, you attract them from all over the country.

Please...
Do Not Feed The Bums

San Fransisco, home of the Fairy building.

olddinosaur: Okay, "pocket ninja:"

The other day the neighbors, who are all a bunch of junkies, were teaching their little kid to pimp his ass to the queers, so they could get money for a shot of smack.

"Why don't you go murder a bunch of Jesus freaks instead," suggested helpfully, "then burn down their house and shoot all their children in the back?"

The parents have accused me of teaching their kid to think like an FBI agent, and have warned me never to go near their children again.

Your turn, "Ninja."

The period goes on the outside in that last quote.

Santa Cruz has this same issue. They give the homeless free reign throughout the city and then complain when they harass them on the street demanding money. SF and SC are basically enablers.

One of the reasons SF and other cities become clogged with homeless is because many cities are passing laws that basically outlaw homelessness. Things like camping bans, ridiculous regulations concerning passing out food to the hungry, strict loitering laws push the homeless out of less tolerant cities to more tolerant places to exist.

There is no shared burden because of these laws. I live in Seattle and know first hand that the homeless can be a problem, but simply making it illegal to be homeless does nothing to alleviate the problem and merely pushes the problem to other, more compassionate cities.

Cities that pass these laws show a shocking lack of compassion and are shirking a vital part of the social contract.

Well, I think what we need to do is start a Homeless National Bank, where we can attract deposits instead of donations, then as soon as it goes broke, we can get a $20 billion Welfare check from the government, like the big boys.

Divided among 1 million homeless, it works out to $13 grand each, more or less.

That's the trouble with these bums: No ambition. Try to chisel a stiff for a few bucks for a six-pack, you're a tramp and a parasite. You need to beg for billions if you ewant respect.

Midnight Rambler: pandabear: Solicites? Was he a Greek playwright or something?

He would only philosophize if you paid him.

Lol.


San Fran is learning the hard way that you don't make fewer people homeless by making it really nice to be homeless.

Dammit Ninja return the lob. There's a reason I have your posts show up in green. Entertain me.

/sorry, drinking and bored
//and Ninja's shiat is always fun to read

The other day the neighbors, who were trying to raise their child right and instill in him a respect for the ethic of work, sent him over to cut the grass, edge the yard, wash the car, etc., for $50.

"You're doing it all wrong," I told the kid. "What you need to do is go to Lexington Kentucky, and find a guy named Drew who sits on his ass drinking Heineken all day long, never works at all and makes good money at it."

The parents have accused me of teaching their kid to think like a Farker, and have warned me never to go near their children again.

I hate the homeless... ness problem.

/The hammer is my penis.

"Homeless people go home!"

Quoted off one of the gold dusts bathroom stalls.

Ral

rotatingpies: Misspellings aside, headline fails because ANYONE who's EVER been to SF knows there's a homeless problem. Especially the people who live there.

This. And I don't know if the people there realize it or not, but it's precisely the city's hippie leftism that created the problem. When you give homeless people all kinds of special rights and benefits, you attract them from all over the country.

Actually it comes more from San Franciscan maniacal obsession with leaving people with any alternative lifestyle alone (unless the alternative lifestyle involves guns). Even with homeless people the attitude is, "We don't have the right to tell homeless people how to live their lives".

I don't disagree with the overall sentiment, but at some point you have to draw the line and step in.

BTW, San Francisco doesn't really have that many hippies. It seems the liberals that infest San Fran are of the intellectually snooty variety. like the grizzled sociology professor you once had who didn't have a single idea of his own. Different story across the bay....

I'm working a contract in the Back Bay of Boston, and it's really impossible to get into the Burger King or Wendys or even the 7-11 on Boyleston St. without being accosted by panhandling bums.

It's like their permanent job -- it's the same folks there every day, and they'll stand in between you and the door and demand "spare change" like they own a damn toll booth on the sidewalk.

I asked the manager of the Burger King why they didn't call the cops on these guys, but he said they can't get them arrested for loitering and there's some kind of law that panhandling is a "civil right" in the City of Boston.

/contract ends in two weeks -- YAY!

brainiac-dumdum:

Cities that pass these laws show a shocking lack of compassion and are shirking a vital part of the social contract.

I'm sorry. What was this contract? I'm still getting over paying for the defaulted loans to the should-have-been-homeless.

Ral: And I don't know if the people there realize it or not, but it's precisely the city's hippie leftism that created the problem. When you give homeless people all kinds of special rights and benefits, you attract them from all over the country.

You are an asshole. Homeless people in SF get about $60 a month from General Assistance (SF welfare), but not if you've just shown up with no ties to the city - then, the best you can get is a one-way ticket somewhere else (assuming the somewhere else has a person who will vouch for you). If you have a place to live you don't qualify for squat unless your rent and utilities combined are less than $400 a month; then the maximum is $442/month. If you also qualify for food stamps, that can add about $170 to the total. Lots of regulations and red tape (thanks to our decidedly non-liberal mayor), and any failure to comply with their requirements, even an error in filling out a form, can get your benefits cut off. Oh, and you have to work as well, usually picking up the garbage the goddam tourists dump everywhere.

I've been in SF for most of my life, and I have seen plenty of people with decent job and money management skills slide into (relative) poverty and have to leave, usually because the rents are so farking high. The average rent for a one-bedroom is about 1600; anyone who loses a rent-controlled apartment is pretty much screwed. Public housing is a joke; the waiting list is now at almost 5,000 people, and the average wait is over four years. Combine that with the loss of jobs and credit, and you have a lot of city residents in need of some kind of assistance to stay where they have lived and worked and paid taxes and rent. None of this is the result of "liberal" anything.

Despite your ignorant bullcrap, this city is not a haven for the poor and dejected, nor can anyone afford to live like a hippie. This is still one of the most expensive places in the world to live, and the city's "special rights and benefits" only exist in the minds of asswipes like you who have obviously never been here.

The other day the neighbors, who are all Scientologists, were reading Dianetics to their children.

"Why don't you just teach them all to be atheists instead?" I suggested. "That way you at least don't have to give any money away to Xenu."

The parents have accused me of infesting their children with Thetans, and have warned me to not come near their home again.

olddinosaur: The parents accuse me of teaching their kid to think like a Republican.

8-year-olds, dude.

I live out in the burbs, and don't really have obvious homeless around here because there aren't enough pedestrians to support them.

Personally, I think they should bus the homeless to old military baracks, where they would have access to some level of medical care, clothing, shelter, and education opportunities. It would have to be a better solution than what we have now, and a lot cheaper.

The big question to ask the homeless is: What have you done in the last 24 hours to improve your situation?

Prussian_Roulette: brainiac-dumdum:

Cities that pass these laws show a shocking lack of compassion and are shirking a vital part of the social contract.

I'm sorry. What was this contract? I'm still getting over paying for the defaulted loans to the should-have-been-homeless.

The social contract as elaborated by these two men-- they were kinda influential on the establishment of our nation:

Daddy's Big Pink Man-Squirrel

Despite your ignorant bullcrap, this city is not a haven for the poor and dejected, nor can anyone afford to live like a hippie. This is still one of the most expensive places in the world to live, and the city's "special rights and benefits" only exist in the minds of asswipes like you who have obviously never been here.

Interestingly, there are comparable cities with much less of a homeless problem, including some with some pretty high rents. Why do you think that is?

I think it's ultimately not much more than this: in other cities, if too many homeless collect in one place, the police will go there and tell them to go somewhere else. Not in San Francisco.

Safety first.

aerojockey: Daddy's Big Pink Man-Squirrel

Despite your ignorant bullcrap, this city is not a haven for the poor and dejected, nor can anyone afford to live like a hippie. This is still one of the most expensive places in the world to live, and the city's "special rights and benefits" only exist in the minds of asswipes like you who have obviously never been here.

Interestingly, there are comparable cities with much less of a homeless problem, including some with some pretty high rents. Why do you think that is?

I think it's ultimately not much more than this: in other cities, if too many homeless collect in one place, the police will go there and tell them to go somewhere else. Not in San Francisco.

It's called compassion and empathy, try it sometime.

TheGreatGazoo

Personally, I think they should bus the homeless to old military baracks, where they would have access to some level of medical care, clothing, shelter, and education opportunities. It would have to be a better solution than what we have now, and a lot cheaper.

New York City used to do something like this, actually. It must have worked pretty well considering that New York's homeless problem is pretty tame. They recently discontinued it; don't know what their policy is now.

San Fran doesn't have a homeless problem, it has a bum problem.