Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(SFGate)   Well of course if you spend $165 million every year on the homeless in your city it's only going to encourage more homeless people to move there   (sfgate.com ) divider line
    More: Obvious, San Francisco, homeless  
•       •       •

5542 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Mar 2014 at 9:21 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



102 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-03-11 07:43:10 PM  
It's obviously a big problem in San Francisco, but I don't think that's how it works, subby.
 
2014-03-11 07:44:54 PM  
To put this into perspective, the population of SF is 825K.  So basically 1% of the people in SF are homeless.

And since their population density is ~17K people per square mile, that gives you 170 homeless people per square mile of land.

Or in other words, the homeless density of SF is the population density of the state of Michigan:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_population_densi t y
 
2014-03-11 07:58:50 PM  
eftimov.net
 
2014-03-11 07:59:43 PM  

meyerkev: To put this into perspective, the population of SF is 825K.  So basically 1% of the people in SF are homeless.

And since their population density is ~17K people per square mile, that gives you 170 homeless people per square mile of land.

Or in other words, the homeless density of SF is the population density of the state of Michigan:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_population_densi t y


LA County alone has about the same number of people as the entire state of Michigan. That one always amazed me.
 
2014-03-11 08:42:02 PM  
img1.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2014-03-11 09:25:38 PM  
God forbid the downtrodden are treated decently; it will only encourage them.
 
2014-03-11 09:28:09 PM  
Came for the Southpark reference. Leaving happy.

Also unsure how I feel about the homeless. I mean, its a serious issue, but I've heard of well off people taking up panhandling as a hobby because it can be good money. Thus, I want to do something, but inherently distrust the people who look the part.

So in the end, its just donating to well researched organisations or community service.
 
2014-03-11 09:28:13 PM  
A city that DOESN'T torment and oppress the homeless? SOHSHULIZZIM!
 
2014-03-11 09:29:31 PM  
Uh, subby, did you read the article? It says the opposite of your headline. Unlike other major cities SF hasn't seen major growth in the homeless population.
 
2014-03-11 09:30:49 PM  
By and large the homeless don't lack food, or shelter, or jobs, they lack adequate mental health treatment. Focus on the cause (mental illness) and you'll fix the symptoms (wandering the streets, eating food out of garbage cans, being unable to hold down a job)
 
2014-03-11 09:33:05 PM  
So, wouldn't they be better off to just give each of the homeless $20,000 each and send them to rural Missouri, or directly rent tiny little apartments or FEMA trailers for them or something?  That's an enormous amount of money.
 
2014-03-11 09:33:32 PM  
SF's problems with the homeless sort of boil down to:

1. Climate -- if you're homeless in SF, you don't really have to move out in the winter.

2. Throwing money at the problem instead of thinking it through -- They never add basic shiat like tracking or employment subsidies, it's always just buying people a sandwich or whatever.  Which fixes the problem for 6 hours at a time, sure, but you need to at least make a minimal effort to think long-term.  SF is in central CA, that's one of the deepest financial holes to climb out of in the US to begin with... they're not helping by having essentially no employment assistance or drug rehab in their programs.
 
2014-03-11 09:33:55 PM  
Lets see...

$165,000,000 / 7,350 Total homeless population of SF as quoted in article =   $22,449 spent per homeless person.  I know it's SF but that seems a little high.
 
2014-03-11 09:35:40 PM  
3:15 And Republican Jesus said: slay the weak, for they are a burden unto thy father
 
2014-03-11 09:35:50 PM  
MARCH THEM INTO THE SEA! ohhh.....sorry. My Republican alter ego got loose there for a sec. All better now. DOWN! DOWN I SAY!
 
2014-03-11 09:44:42 PM  

Jim_Callahan: 2. Throwing money at the problem instead of thinking it through -- They never add basic shiat like tracking or employment subsidies, it's always just buying people a sandwich or whatever. Which fixes the problem for 6 hours at a time, sure, but you need to at least make a minimal effort to think long-term. SF is in central CA, that's one of the deepest financial holes to climb out of in the US to begin with... they're not helping by having essentially no employment assistance or drug rehab in their programs.


Actually, it's primarily housing, FTA: "San Francisco's budget is nearly $8 billion and of the $165 million it spends on homeless services every year, by far the biggest portion - $81.5 million - is spent on supportive housing. Fried argued that makes sense because studies have consistently shown it's less expensive to house people than provide emergency services on the streets. " It's also things like employment services, http://www.sfhsa.org/276.htm, help with health care including mental health, http://www.sfhsa.org/80.htm, etc.

Also one nitpick, San Francisco is not in central California. It's in neither the central valley region of the central coast region. The bay area is considered northern California.
 
2014-03-11 09:45:14 PM  
I've been all over the country and I've never encountered as many homeless people as I did in San Francisco. Every ten feet one of them would hit me up for money.
 
2014-03-11 09:49:48 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: By and large the homeless don't lack food, or shelter, or jobs, they lack adequate mental health treatment. Focus on the cause (mental illness) and you'll fix the symptoms (wandering the streets, eating food out of garbage cans, being unable to hold down a job)


This is true for adults. For youth, it's often a lifestyle which should be corrected.
 
2014-03-11 09:52:05 PM  
I've traveled a bit and seen homeless folks all around and from multiple continents, but I've never run into homeless folk that felt more entitled and were harder to please than in San Francisco.  Even when I was giving them a couple bucks they still seemed to get insulted by it...  Maybe I just had a bad experience, but SF seemed like a whole different world when it came to the transients...
 
2014-03-11 09:54:20 PM  

Jim_Callahan: SF's problems with the homeless sort of boil down to:

1. Climate -- if you're homeless in SF, you don't really have to move out in the winter.

2. Throwing money at the problem instead of thinking it through -- They never add basic shiat like tracking or employment subsidies, it's always just buying people a sandwich or whatever.  Which fixes the problem for 6 hours at a time, sure, but you need to at least make a minimal effort to think long-term.  SF is in central CA, that's one of the deepest financial holes to climb out of in the US to begin with... they're not helping by having essentially no employment assistance or drug rehab in their programs.


3. Exorbitant rents.
 
2014-03-11 09:55:18 PM  

Walker: I've been all over the country and I've never encountered as many homeless people as I did in San Francisco. Every ten feet one of them would hit me up for money.


Try Telegraph avenue in Berkley. It's worse.
 
2014-03-11 09:55:37 PM  
Wait, isn't this what the Mystery Google Barge is for?  Put all the homeless in shipping container house units and tow them around the Bay... Sweet.
 
2014-03-11 09:56:22 PM  

Jim_Callahan: SF's problems with the homeless sort of boil down to:

1. Climate -- if you're homeless in SF, you don't really have to move out in the winter.

2. Throwing money at the problem instead of thinking it through -- They never add basic shiat like tracking or employment subsidies, it's always just buying people a sandwich or whatever.  Which fixes the problem for 6 hours at a time, sure, but you need to at least make a minimal effort to think long-term.  SF is in central CA, that's one of the deepest financial holes to climb out of in the US to begin with... they're not helping by having essentially no employment assistance or drug rehab in their programs.


I'm not so sure of that. The first time I visited SF I nearly froze my balls off. 92 degrees in San Jose, went downtown SF and it was 61. Next time I was there I made sure to carry long pants and a hoodie with me.
 
2014-03-11 10:00:04 PM  

fusillade762: Walker: I've been all over the country and I've never encountered as many homeless people as I did in San Francisco. Every ten feet one of them would hit me up for money.

Try Telegraph avenue in Berkley. It's worse.


I wish I had a good solution for the homeless. I try not to be a dick but my observations suggest that it's true, giving money to the homeless is like feeding feral animals. It seems like the humane thing to do, but it makes the problem worse.

I wouldn't mind beggars if so many weren't so aggressive. Or maybe if they would do something in return. Adopt a section of the sidewalk or an intersection and keep it clean. A few minutes with a broom or trash bag earns a lot of sympathy.
 
2014-03-11 10:00:40 PM  

nilThreek: I've traveled a bit and seen homeless folks all around and from multiple continents, but I've never run into homeless folk that felt more entitled and were harder to please than in San Francisco.  Even when I was giving them a couple bucks they still seemed to get insulted by it...  Maybe I just had a bad experience, but SF seemed like a whole different world when it came to the transients...


Concur.  And crazier than usual.  I've talked with homeless in Chicago, LA, San Diego, and some other international places.  They were, generally, soft spoken if a little spacey.  But just about all the ones that I encountered in SF (years and years ago) were intensely and boisterously crazy; to Jerky Boys character proportions.

I realize that the word data is not the plural form of anecdote, but that was my experience.
 
2014-03-11 10:07:37 PM  

Walker: I've been all over the country and I've never encountered as many homeless people as I did in San Francisco. Every ten feet one of them would hit me up for money.


In what should be a surprise to nobody panhandlers tend to congregate in higher concentrations where there is a lot of foot traffic, especially tourist areas. While there certainly areas of the city where there are an incredible number of homeless (the worst being the tenderloin/union square area, the haight, and parts of the the mission) there are also sections of the city where seeing a homeless person is a rarity. Union Square, where most visitors get to see the city's homeless problem up close, is especially bad since it is one of the biggest tourist areas and it is adjacent to the worst neighborhood in the city where most of the homeless reside. It is somewhat ironic that the expensive shopping district is right next to cracktown central.
 
2014-03-11 10:11:43 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: By and large the homeless don't lack food, or shelter, or jobs, they lack adequate mental health treatment. Focus on the cause (mental illness) and you'll fix the symptoms (wandering the streets, eating food out of garbage cans, being unable to hold down a job)


Yeah, but that costs money, and what do you do when they stop taking their meds or going to therapy?  We cannot go back to the days of grabbing them and tossing them in an asylum to rot.
 
2014-03-11 10:12:39 PM  
The friendliest, most easy-going homeless people are in DC, in my opinion.  Since we're comparing homeless people here.

Santa Monica has a good-sized homeless population as well.  But no place beats San Francisco for human excement on the sidewalks.
 
2014-03-11 10:16:12 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: By and large the homeless don't lack food, or shelter, or jobs, they lack adequate mental health treatment. Focus on the cause (mental illness) and you'll fix the symptoms (wandering the streets, eating food out of garbage cans, being unable to hold down a job)


True. And it'd be very wise to invest some of those dollars on folks that haven't fully lost it yet. Mental health care is a travesty in the US.
 
2014-03-11 10:16:33 PM  
Hobos been roaming the states for years.

I met a guy who summered in Kenosha, WI.  He'd head west every winter to pan handle and come spring time he'd show back up. He slept by the lake a lot. Wore a Rolex watch and had a nice BMW he would only drive to see his doctor once a month. He liked to hang out at the hipstar dive beer bar downtown, I think they called him Smiling Jack.
 
2014-03-11 10:16:47 PM  
FTFA - Sherilyn Adams is the executive director of Youth Services, which works to get homeless youth off the streets. She said that in any given year, 5,700 people ages 12 through 24...

Gods, here we go again... that age range is not correct. Once you hit 18-19, you are a young adult... NOT a 'youth'. If this keeps up, soon we are going to be reading about "kids 12-30"!

/while it is true that some people are mentally adults when they are 15, and some are not even close to it when they hit 40, the fact remains that this grouping is more a reference to all the helicopter parenting than any actual attempt to ascertain an age of responsibility. If you can be put into a war when you are 18, you should be considered an adult. Regardless of what the money-grubbing medical industry wants you to think (and I assure you this is what is really going on).
 
2014-03-11 10:20:37 PM  
James-you're not a dick.  My experience in working with the homeless is if they panhandle you, tell them you'll buy them a sandwich...guarantee they move on.  They don't want food-they want booze or drug money.  Mental health issues are what they need to be focusing on.
 
2014-03-11 10:21:00 PM  

meat0918: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: By and large the homeless don't lack food, or shelter, or jobs, they lack adequate mental health treatment. Focus on the cause (mental illness) and you'll fix the symptoms (wandering the streets, eating food out of garbage cans, being unable to hold down a job)

Yeah, but that costs money, and what do you do when they stop taking their meds or going to therapy?  We cannot go back to the days of grabbing them and tossing them in an asylum to rot.


NY is actually doing something to deal with those who won't take meds. Its some kind of supervised outpatient. Supposedly for the craziest of the crazies, and only those who won't stay on meds.

Can't recall the program tho
 
2014-03-11 10:21:02 PM  

James10952001: I wish I had a good solution for the homeless. I try not to be a dick but my observations suggest that it's true, giving money to the homeless is like feeding feral animals. It seems like the humane thing to do, but it makes the problem worse.


It also encourages neighboring states like Nevada to drop their hopeless-case mentally ill onto interstate buses for a 1-way trip to San Francisco, and voila, not their problem anymore.
 
2014-03-11 10:24:58 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: By and large the homeless don't lack food, or shelter, or jobs, they lack adequate mental health treatment. Focus on the cause (mental illness) and you'll fix the symptoms (wandering the streets, eating food out of garbage cans, being unable to hold down a job)


Lots of homeless people don't eat out of garbage cans, and some have jobs.

I had a job and was homeless when I was 21.
 
2014-03-11 10:25:55 PM  
Someone should make some sort of modest proposal.
 
2014-03-11 10:25:59 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: By and large the homeless don't lack food, or shelter, or jobs, they lack adequate mental health treatment. Focus on the cause (mental illness) and you'll fix the symptoms (wandering the streets, eating food out of garbage cans, being unable to hold down a job)


And/or alcohol or drug addiction.

The visibly homeless are the most
Severe cases. Panhandlers/winos, etc.

The invisible homeless are the ones sleeping in cars, spending the day in the library, coffee shops.

Those people are generally employable and down on their luck.
 
2014-03-11 10:26:50 PM  

James10952001: fusillade762: Walker: I've been all over the country and I've never encountered as many homeless people as I did in San Francisco. Every ten feet one of them would hit me up for money.

Try Telegraph avenue in Berkley. It's worse.

I wish I had a good solution for the homeless. I try not to be a dick but my observations suggest that it's true, giving money to the homeless is like feeding feral animals. It seems like the humane thing to do, but it makes the problem worse.

I wouldn't mind beggars if so many weren't so aggressive. Or maybe if they would do something in return. Adopt a section of the sidewalk or an intersection and keep it clean. A few minutes with a broom or trash bag earns a lot of sympathy.


A few minutes with a broom or a trash bag will not buy you your next fix/drink though, so why bother. There are some "normal" destitute people out there of course who actually care and want to do good, but they aint the ones pan handling. Pan handling is for straight cash to go score, to go pan handle, to score again...
 
2014-03-11 10:35:41 PM  
I am just amazed the story was not about Petersburg Florida.

Worst homeless problem I have ever seen.  It made Honolulu look homeless-free.
 
2014-03-11 10:36:04 PM  
 
2014-03-11 10:49:30 PM  

eggrolls: It doesn't have to be a problem.

http://www.nationofchange.org/utah-ending-homelessness-giving-people -h omes-1390056183


I was talking about the homeless problem today with a coworker, and he changed his tune a bit when I brought up Utah's program (and by extension his church) is doing this.

It was amazing, and kinda creepy.
 
2014-03-11 10:51:22 PM  

meat0918: eggrolls: It doesn't have to be a problem.

http://www.nationofchange.org/utah-ending-homelessness-giving-people -h omes-1390056183

I was talking about the homeless problem today with a coworker, and he changed his tune a bit when I brought up Utah's program (and by extension his church) is doing this.

It was amazing, and kinda creepy.


I'm probably reading to much into it really.
 
2014-03-11 10:57:22 PM  

eggrolls: It doesn't have to be a problem.

http://www.nationofchange.org/utah-ending-homelessness-giving-people -h omes-1390056183


My bad.  I conflate the "homeless problem" with the "people with mental problems who should be institutionalized but sleep on sidewalks problem".  Free houses won't fix a mental health care problem.   But if that works with the "working poor", outstanding work there.
 
2014-03-11 10:59:15 PM  

Laobaojun: eggrolls: It doesn't have to be a problem.

http://www.nationofchange.org/utah-ending-homelessness-giving-people -h omes-1390056183

My bad.  I conflate the "homeless problem" with the "people with mental problems who should be institutionalized but sleep on sidewalks problem".  Free houses won't fix a mental health care problem.   But if that works with the "working poor", outstanding work there.


They couple it with social workers who get them mental health care too.
 
2014-03-11 11:09:59 PM  

Caffienatedjedi: Came for the Southpark reference. Leaving happy.

Also unsure how I feel about the homeless. I mean, its a serious issue, but I've heard of well off people taking up panhandling as a hobby because it can be good money. Thus, I want to do something, but inherently distrust the people who look the part.

So in the end, its just donating to well researched organisations or community service.


Libby McLiblib here.

I live and work in NYC.

I have never given money to any homeless people.

Homeless want money for either 1) Drugs 2) Booze

You can always find social services when you are homeless that will give you food, or a place to stay, you won't get social services that will provide you for your vices.

There are of course people with deep rooted psych problems out there, who may need money for other things, but there is help for them as well.  It is not my responsibility to supplement your irresponsible ways.

Food and shelter are offered free, drugs and booze aren't.

Have a nice day.
 
2014-03-11 11:15:59 PM  
Give a homeless man sandwich, feed him for 8 hours. Give a homeless man the lions at the zoo, feed the lions for 8 hours and have one less homeless person. 

Win-win, no?
 
2014-03-11 11:16:55 PM  

fusillade762: Walker: I've been all over the country and I've never encountered as many homeless people as I did in San Francisco. Every ten feet one of them would hit me up for money.

Try Telegraph avenue in Berkley. It's worse.


Try Santa Cruz. It's worse
 
2014-03-11 11:17:39 PM  

James10952001: Jim_Callahan: SF's problems with the homeless sort of boil down to:

1. Climate -- if you're homeless in SF, you don't really have to move out in the winter.

2. Throwing money at the problem instead of thinking it through -- They never add basic shiat like tracking or employment subsidies, it's always just buying people a sandwich or whatever.  Which fixes the problem for 6 hours at a time, sure, but you need to at least make a minimal effort to think long-term.  SF is in central CA, that's one of the deepest financial holes to climb out of in the US to begin with... they're not helping by having essentially no employment assistance or drug rehab in their programs.

I'm not so sure of that. The first time I visited SF I nearly froze my balls off. 92 degrees in San Jose, went downtown SF and it was 61. Next time I was there I made sure to carry long pants and a hoodie with me.


When was the last time San Francisco saw 2' of snow on the ground and temperatures never rose above freezing for a couple months?
 
2014-03-11 11:22:42 PM  

Watubi: fusillade762: Walker: I've been all over the country and I've never encountered as many homeless people as I did in San Francisco. Every ten feet one of them would hit me up for money.

Try Telegraph avenue in Berkley. It's worse.

Try Santa Cruz. It's worse


What's crazier is that all these places have more panhandlers than Oakland (well, not Santa Cruz, not anymore at least).  Subby is right, though, the availability of services among other things brings panhandlers to SF.  My local bums here in Oakland can be found part time in SF because that's where the money is (but they live in Oakland - they're not homeless, just professional panhandlers).
 
2014-03-11 11:22:58 PM  
If only there was some sort of island with institutional lodging near San Francisco where we could send them.
 
2014-03-11 11:29:41 PM  

meat0918: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: By and large the homeless don't lack food, or shelter, or jobs, they lack adequate mental health treatment. Focus on the cause (mental illness) and you'll fix the symptoms (wandering the streets, eating food out of garbage cans, being unable to hold down a job)

Yeah, but that costs money, and what do you do when they stop taking their meds or going to therapy?  We cannot go back to the days of grabbing them and tossing them in an asylum to rot.


People don't usually stop taking meds if the meds work and make them feel better. The meds we have aren't expensive, they just don't work well or all the time. Fund research.
 
2014-03-11 11:32:29 PM  

FarkerSnow: If only there was some sort of island with institutional lodging near San Francisco where we could send them.


So you are saying being poor should be a crime?
img.fark.net
Intriguing.
 
2014-03-11 11:37:48 PM  
$5 McDonald's gift cards and/or crack make for good things to give homeless people.
 
2014-03-11 11:38:24 PM  

trailerpimp: James-you're not a dick.  My experience in working with the homeless is if they panhandle you, tell them you'll buy them a sandwich...guarantee they move on.  They don't want food-they want booze or drug money.  Mental health issues are what they need to be focusing on.


One time about 15 years ago a homeless guy hit me up for some money "to buy something to eat" as I was crossing the street in NY. Ordinarily id ignore them because you dont know what theyd spend the money on and id always feel like a chump after giving someone cash. But I was going to a dunkin donuts anyway so I said "I'm going in here, what would you like? He said "can I get a chocolate chip muffin and a large mocha latte" which cracked me up. How does a homeless guy get a taste for mocha latte and what balls on him for asking for an expensive drink. His order was more than twice as expensive as the coffee and donut I was getting for myself.

Anyway I got it for him but still think it was pretty funny.
 
2014-03-11 11:40:47 PM  

tripleseven: Caffienatedjedi: Came for the Southpark reference. Leaving happy.

Also unsure how I feel about the homeless. I mean, its a serious issue, but I've heard of well off people taking up panhandling as a hobby because it can be good money. Thus, I want to do something, but inherently distrust the people who look the part.

So in the end, its just donating to well researched organisations or community service.

Libby McLiblib here.

I live and work in NYC.

I have never given money to any homeless people.

Homeless want money for either 1) Drugs 2) Booze

You can always find social services when you are homeless that will give you food, or a place to stay, you won't get social services that will provide you for your vices.

There are of course people with deep rooted psych problems out there, who may need money for other things, but there is help for them as well.  It is not my responsibility to supplement your irresponsible ways.

Food and shelter are offered free, drugs and booze aren't.

Have a nice day.


Oh yeah. This. Get a homeless jar. Whenever anyone asks you for money, decline politely and put a buck in the homeless jar when you get home. Then take the cash in jar once in a while and give it to a charity you trust or a shelter.
 
2014-03-11 11:53:54 PM  

Caffienatedjedi: FarkerSnow: If only there was some sort of island with institutional lodging near San Francisco where we could send them.

So you are saying being poor should be a crime?
[img.fark.net image 225x168]
Intriguing.


No, I was just saying that we should send them to Alcatraz.
 
2014-03-11 11:54:53 PM  
When it gets super hot out I just say fark it & buy them a cold beer & a Gatorade.

Otherwise it's sandwiches.
 
2014-03-12 12:03:44 AM  

Debeo Summa Credo: tripleseven: Caffienatedjedi: Came for the Southpark reference. Leaving happy.

Also unsure how I feel about the homeless. I mean, its a serious issue, but I've heard of well off people taking up panhandling as a hobby because it can be good money. Thus, I want to do something, but inherently distrust the people who look the part.

So in the end, its just donating to well researched organisations or community service.

Libby McLiblib here.

I live and work in NYC.

I have never given money to any homeless people.

Homeless want money for either 1) Drugs 2) Booze

You can always find social services when you are homeless that will give you food, or a place to stay, you won't get social services that will provide you for your vices.

There are of course people with deep rooted psych problems out there, who may need money for other things, but there is help for them as well.  It is not my responsibility to supplement your irresponsible ways.

Food and shelter are offered free, drugs and booze aren't.

Have a nice day.

Oh yeah. This. Get a homeless jar. Whenever anyone asks you for money, decline politely and put a buck in the homeless jar when you get home. Then take the cash in jar once in a while and give it to a charity you trust or a shelter.


Fiancee and I donate to the ASPCA, and Cancer charities yearly.
 
2014-03-12 12:06:17 AM  

Stoj: When it gets super hot out I just say fark it & buy them a cold beer & a Gatorade.

Otherwise it's sandwiches.


Well, beer I guess, but do they take the sandwiches?

On the subway one day, guy doing the usual spiel, "I'll take money, food, or whatever you can give me!"  Some lady gave him a banana.  He took it, and when he was walking through the packed car, dropped t on a sleeping ladies lap.

I wasn't around when she woke up, I would have paid to see her reaction.  Like, WTF or hey, free banana!
 
2014-03-12 12:10:07 AM  

tripleseven: Stoj: When it gets super hot out I just say fark it & buy them a cold beer & a Gatorade.

Otherwise it's sandwiches.

Well, beer I guess, but do they take the sandwiches?

On the subway one day, guy doing the usual spiel, "I'll take money, food, or whatever you can give me!"  Some lady gave him a banana.  He took it, and when he was walking through the packed car, dropped t on a sleeping ladies lap.

I wasn't around when she woke up, I would have paid to see her reaction.  Like, WTF or hey, free banana!


It's been a long time since one of them turned down food, but it happens.
 
2014-03-12 12:15:45 AM  

fusillade762: Walker: I've been all over the country and I've never encountered as many homeless people as I did in San Francisco. Every ten feet one of them would hit me up for money.

Try Telegraph avenue in Berkley. It's worse.


Are you sure those aren't students?
 
2014-03-12 12:25:03 AM  

James10952001: Jim_Callahan: SF's problems with the homeless sort of boil down to:

1. Climate -- if you're homeless in SF, you don't really have to move out in the winter.

2. Throwing money at the problem instead of thinking it through -- They never add basic shiat like tracking or employment subsidies, it's always just buying people a sandwich or whatever.  Which fixes the problem for 6 hours at a time, sure, but you need to at least make a minimal effort to think long-term.  SF is in central CA, that's one of the deepest financial holes to climb out of in the US to begin with... they're not helping by having essentially no employment assistance or drug rehab in their programs.

I'm not so sure of that. The first time I visited SF I nearly froze my balls off. 92 degrees in San Jose, went downtown SF and it was 61. Next time I was there I made sure to carry long pants and a hoodie with me.


Uh, WHAT? That word you keep using, I do not think it means what you think it means.  61* is basically what the temps have been here for the past few days and people are out riding their motorcycles and jogging shorts.  61* is a nice spring day.  That's no where near 'freeze my balls off' territory ... now, these temps here a few weeks ago, came perilously close to that point ... especially with the wind chills nearing -50*F.

fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net
 
2014-03-12 12:29:40 AM  
seadoo2006: Your car redlines at 70? Sheesh.
 
2014-03-12 12:56:30 AM  
amazing that you farkers will criticize republicans and then become one when dealing with
a one on one basis.
 
2014-03-12 12:58:02 AM  

Zanzibar Buck Buck McFate: seadoo2006: Your car redlines at 70? Sheesh.


That's a tach... hence the x100. 7000 rpm.
 
2014-03-12 01:04:15 AM  

doofusss: amazing that you farkers will criticize republicans and then become one when dealing with
a one on one basis.


You got that right.  

"Philanthropy is commendable, but it must not cause the philanthropist to overlook the circumstances of economic injustice which make philanthropy necessary."

Martin Luthor King, what a commie.
 
2014-03-12 01:06:52 AM  
NJ can solve the homeless population problem by buying all the homeless people one way bus tickets to San Francisco

That would be very cheap
 
2014-03-12 01:14:52 AM  

doofusss: amazing that you farkers will criticize republicans and then become one when dealing with
a one on one basis.


Lawl.

Homeless people need help.

Whether it is a pace to stay, or food, or services to deal with their addictions and medical/mental issues.

I just won't buy them drugs or alcohol.  I have no problem whatsoever buying them a meal or a place to stay.  My tax dollars pay for that, and I have no issue with it.

Republicans just don't, and apparently never will get it.
 
2014-03-12 01:20:03 AM  
No connection between all those people losing their homes over the last few years and the increase in homelessness.   Nope, none at all.
 
2014-03-12 01:20:15 AM  

seadoo2006: James10952001: Jim_Callahan: SF's problems with the homeless sort of boil down to:

1. Climate -- if you're homeless in SF, you don't really have to move out in the winter.

2. Throwing money at the problem instead of thinking it through -- They never add basic shiat like tracking or employment subsidies, it's always just buying people a sandwich or whatever.  Which fixes the problem for 6 hours at a time, sure, but you need to at least make a minimal effort to think long-term.  SF is in central CA, that's one of the deepest financial holes to climb out of in the US to begin with... they're not helping by having essentially no employment assistance or drug rehab in their programs.

I'm not so sure of that. The first time I visited SF I nearly froze my balls off. 92 degrees in San Jose, went downtown SF and it was 61. Next time I was there I made sure to carry long pants and a hoodie with me.

Uh, WHAT? That word you keep using, I do not think it means what you think it means.  61* is basically what the temps have been here for the past few days and people are out riding their motorcycles and jogging shorts.  61* is a nice spring day.  That's no where near 'freeze my balls off' territory ... now, these temps here a few weeks ago, came perilously close to that point ... especially with the wind chills nearing -50*F.

[fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net image 850x637]


2004 Passat?
 
2014-03-12 01:44:58 AM  

NephilimNexus: No connection between all those people losing their homes over the last few years and the increase in homelessness.   Nope, none at all.


dumbocrats should have known the stupidity would spread
 
2014-03-12 01:56:33 AM  

itcamefromschenectady: People don't usually stop taking meds if the meds work and make them feel better. The meds we have aren't expensive, they just don't work well or all the time. Fund research.


Under "not working well", I'd also add "may have some pretty non-trivial side effects". If you're clear-headed and rational (or at least as much so as the average person) but feel like shiat, staying on the meds may not be such an easy decision to make, even if they are effective at countering the mental illness itself. (And if they don't do a great job of that either...)

So yeah, fund research.
 
2014-03-12 02:14:35 AM  

SashiRomanenko: Zanzibar Buck Buck McFate: seadoo2006: Your car redlines at 70? Sheesh.

That's a tach... hence the x100. 7000 rpm.


My uncle claims his MG had a similar looking speedo and tach, one day when a cop pulled him over for speeding he said he had been reading the guages backward and got off with a warning.

Then again, he might have been full of shiat.
 
2014-03-12 02:21:02 AM  

itcamefromschenectady: meat0918: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: By and large the homeless don't lack food, or shelter, or jobs, they lack adequate mental health treatment. Focus on the cause (mental illness) and you'll fix the symptoms (wandering the streets, eating food out of garbage cans, being unable to hold down a job)

Yeah, but that costs money, and what do you do when they stop taking their meds or going to therapy?  We cannot go back to the days of grabbing them and tossing them in an asylum to rot.

People don't usually stop taking meds if the meds work and make them feel better. The meds we have aren't expensive, they just don't work well or all the time. Fund research.


Mental illness complicates things.The illness tells you not to take meds.

Navigating the health care system is hard enough when you have fully functional mental capacities.
 
2014-03-12 02:26:13 AM  

James10952001: Jim_Callahan: SF's problems with the homeless sort of boil down to:

1. Climate -- if you're homeless in SF, you don't really have to move out in the winter.

2. Throwing money at the problem instead of thinking it through -- They never add basic shiat like tracking or employment subsidies, it's always just buying people a sandwich or whatever.  Which fixes the problem for 6 hours at a time, sure, but you need to at least make a minimal effort to think long-term.  SF is in central CA, that's one of the deepest financial holes to climb out of in the US to begin with... they're not helping by having essentially no employment assistance or drug rehab in their programs.

I'm not so sure of that. The first time I visited SF I nearly froze my balls off. 92 degrees in San Jose, went downtown SF and it was 61. Next time I was there I made sure to carry long pants and a hoodie with me.


You almost froze your balls off at 61?

That's so adorable!
 
2014-03-12 02:29:33 AM  
Also, I see the usual trolls are here with their "Fark the homeless" bit.
 
2014-03-12 02:35:13 AM  

MartinaMcSorley: The friendliest, most easy-going homeless people are in DC, in my opinion.  Since we're comparing homeless people here.

Santa Monica has a good-sized homeless population as well.  But no place beats San Francisco for human excement on the sidewalks.


At last count, just a few weeks ago, Santa Monica's homeless population was 742. It's a small fraction of the thousands in Los Angeles - downtown, especially.
 
2014-03-12 02:43:39 AM  

spatulacity: Lets see...

$165,000,000 / 7,350 Total homeless population of SF as quoted in article =   $22,449 spent per homeless person.  I know it's SF but that seems a little high.


You're forgetting of of the private sector corporations that take government funding to supply services to the poor that need to make a profit.

The so called private sector survives on the government tit as bad as the so called "Takers"
 
2014-03-12 02:44:58 AM  

James10952001: Jim_Callahan: SF's problems with the homeless sort of boil down to:

1. Climate -- if you're homeless in SF, you don't really have to move out in the winter.

2. Throwing money at the problem instead of thinking it through -- They never add basic shiat like tracking or employment subsidies, it's always just buying people a sandwich or whatever.  Which fixes the problem for 6 hours at a time, sure, but you need to at least make a minimal effort to think long-term.  SF is in central CA, that's one of the deepest financial holes to climb out of in the US to begin with... they're not helping by having essentially no employment assistance or drug rehab in their programs.

I'm not so sure of that. The first time I visited SF I nearly froze my balls off. 92 degrees in San Jose, went downtown SF and it was 61. Next time I was there I made sure to carry long pants and a hoodie with me.


Really?  YOur balls are that weak that they "Freeze" in 60 degree weather?
 
2014-03-12 02:51:47 AM  

tripleseven: Caffienatedjedi: Came for the Southpark reference. Leaving happy.

Also unsure how I feel about the homeless. I mean, its a serious issue, but I've heard of well off people taking up panhandling as a hobby because it can be good money. Thus, I want to do something, but inherently distrust the people who look the part.

So in the end, its just donating to well researched organisations or community service.

Libby McLiblib here.

I live and work in NYC.

I have never given money to any homeless people.

Homeless want money for either 1) Drugs 2) Booze

You can always find social services when you are homeless that will give you food, or a place to stay, you won't get social services that will provide you for your vices.

There are of course people with deep rooted psych problems out there, who may need money for other things, but there is help for them as well.  It is not my responsibility to supplement your irresponsible ways.

Food and shelter are offered free, drugs and booze aren't.

Have a nice day.



Same view here.  There are services out there that will give shelter and food to those that seek them. I am more then  happy to pay taxes for these services to make sure that no person in America needs to go hungry.  No need for me to give them cash for vices.

The rampant use of debit cards has made stiffing beggars sooo much easier!
 
2014-03-12 03:10:39 AM  
You mean taking money from people who work and giving it to people who are freeloading scum so that both groups will have the exact same stuff doesn't encourage the freeloading bums to pursue degrees in chemical engineering? Who knew.

Hey, I have an idea. Let's raise the unemployment benefits to 6,000 weeks, and pay people 110% of their regular wage, for, you know, compassion's sake. And let's change the funding so that it is taken from additional properties taxes on single-family dwellings between 1,000 sq ft and 3,000 sq ft.
 
2014-03-12 03:16:28 AM  

BigNumber12: It also encourages neighboring states like Nevada to drop their hopeless-case mentally ill onto interstate buses for a 1-way trip to San Francisco, and voila, not their problem anymore.


San Francisco has taken to billing agencies in other states and counties that do that.,
 
2014-03-12 03:27:11 AM  

Mr.Hawk: Pan handling is for straight cash to go score, to go pan handle, to score again...

pay the mortgage on your 2300 sq ft house one off the corner of 2nd and Elm.

FTFY
 
2014-03-12 03:40:58 AM  
tell you what seveniswhatever. Maybe you go fark yourself? and perhaps die, do the world a favour. Just saying, think about it will you?
 
2014-03-12 08:59:27 AM  

JoieD'Zen: God forbid the downtrodden are treated decently; it will only encourage them.


They are like cocaine monkeys. They will just sit there hitting the cocaine button over and over as long as it is provided.

Conscript the homeless, make them do menial labor in exchange for fair wages, or kick them out, drive them 100 miles somewhere else.
 
2014-03-12 09:33:48 AM  
Wow. it's almost as if getting stuff for free doesn't inspire one to work to change their situation. Crazy.
 
2014-03-12 10:30:24 AM  

spatulacity: Lets see...

$165,000,000 / 7,350 Total homeless population of SF as quoted in article =   $22,449 spent per homeless person.  I know it's SF but that seems a little high.


Can't forget the enormous overhead of  "administrative costs."

Wanna feed the poor? Gotta feed the machine first.
 
2014-03-12 10:39:59 AM  
A while back, there was a kerfuffle about the homeless in SF that highlights some of the problems the city faces.

So, the city had invested heavily in housing for the homeless.  Their goal was to ensure that everyone had a home to go to.  They were about 200 units short, and they expected to pay for half those units from city coffers, and the other half would be covered by a homeless rights advocacy group they had previously entered in an agreement with.

The group declined to pay entirely, but that wasn't the whole of the issue.

See, long ago, SF courts had judged that because the homeless had nowhere to go, they shouldn't be arrested for things that other people get arrested for, for example, open flames - esp. in city parks -, public defecation or urination, nudity, sleep on the sidewalk, and a host of other issues, because they had nowhere else to cook, crap, clean, etc.  This effectively made it illegal to arrest most vagrants unless they were being actively violent - they were a protected minority.

So, when they were nearly at a 1:1 ratio with homeless to free housing for the homeless, SF asked - why do we still have so many homeless people on the street?  Turns out that a couple hundred of them WANT to be homeless.  Well, since SF provided potential free housing, they asked a judge to modify the homeless protection laws; they would not be arrested initially, but the police would give them info/escort to free housing where they could do those things.   If they received 3 warnings total, THEN they could be arrested (indicating that they wouldn't accept free housing).

The homeless advocacy group railed against this claiming that SF was deliberately trying to eliminate the homeless by forcing them to accept housing - then they'd no longer be homeless!

This was actually a big issue for some folks.  In some folks eyes, getting rid of the homeless by giving them places to live is something only a monster would do.  They claimed that big businesses (by which they mostly meant sole proprietorships and other small businesses) were leading the effort in an attempt to beautify the areas around their stores, especially by certain parks where homeless tend to crap in doorwells and assault people on the sidewalk - which should be their state-protected right!

This is the sort of mentality that appears all too often in SF.

Got the hell out of that state as soon as I could ...
 
2014-03-12 10:40:12 AM  

doubled99: Wow. it's almost as if getting stuff for free doesn't inspire one to work to change their situation. Crazy.


The phrase that comes to mind is "the gift of desperation."

The heart-string pieces designed to make me feel more compassionate about the long-term unemployment issue are the most counter-productive. I can FEEL myself turning more conservative even though I hate a good portion of their agenda.

Some woman worked for 5 years at a job and has been collecting unemployment for 2 years after getting laid off. She complained that if she didn't get her benefits reinstated she would "have to dip into her savings."

Some guy complained that once his 2 years of unemployment lapsed, he was afraid that he "might have to get a job doing menial labor."

/Thanks libs
//Gonna practice that for a while was the transformation happens
///libslibslibslibslibslibs
 
2014-03-12 10:59:08 AM  
Mark 14:7-8: The poor will always be with you, and you may help them any time you want.
 
2014-03-12 11:29:40 AM  

SevenizGud: You mean taking money from people who work and giving it to people who are freeloading scum so that both groups will have the exact same stuff doesn't encourage the freeloading bums to pursue degrees in chemical engineering? Who knew.

Hey, I have an idea. Let's raise the unemployment benefits to 6,000 weeks, and pay people 110% of their regular wage, for, you know, compassion's sake. And let's change the funding so that it is taken from additional properties taxes on single-family dwellings between 1,000 sq ft and 3,000 sq ft.


That's a nice straw man you got there.
 
2014-03-12 11:54:10 AM  

grumpfuff: SevenizGud: You mean taking money from people who work and giving it to people who are freeloading scum so that both groups will have the exact same stuff doesn't encourage the freeloading bums to pursue degrees in chemical engineering? Who knew.

Hey, I have an idea. Let's raise the unemployment benefits to 6,000 weeks, and pay people 110% of their regular wage, for, you know, compassion's sake. And let's change the funding so that it is taken from additional properties taxes on single-family dwellings between 1,000 sq ft and 3,000 sq ft.

That's a nice straw man you got there.


You're generous in giving a label of straw man.

I was thinking more along the lines completely irrational, up to and possibly including mental illness.

We can check back at the next climate change thread to get a better assessment.
 
2014-03-12 12:29:37 PM  

Pangea: grumpfuff: SevenizGud: You mean taking money from people who work and giving it to people who are freeloading scum so that both groups will have the exact same stuff doesn't encourage the freeloading bums to pursue degrees in chemical engineering? Who knew.

Hey, I have an idea. Let's raise the unemployment benefits to 6,000 weeks, and pay people 110% of their regular wage, for, you know, compassion's sake. And let's change the funding so that it is taken from additional properties taxes on single-family dwellings between 1,000 sq ft and 3,000 sq ft.

That's a nice straw man you got there.

You're generous in giving a label of straw man.

I was thinking more along the lines completely irrational, up to and possibly including mental illness.

We can check back at the next climate change thread to get a better assessment.


Well, apparently he got tired of his misleading charts getting ripped to shreds, so he no longer posts them. He just refers to them now. Though he still complains that people who disagree with him are anti-science, so there's that.
 
2014-03-12 12:37:33 PM  

Thunderpipes: JoieD'Zen: God forbid the downtrodden are treated decently; it will only encourage them.

They are like cocaine monkeys. They will just sit there hitting the cocaine button over and over as long as it is provided.

Conscript the homeless, make them do menial labor in exchange for fair wages, or kick them out, drive them 100 miles somewhere else.


If you give cocaine monkeys a nice place to live, they don't get addicted to cocaine.  Turns out, putting animals into tiny cages with poor conditions makes them more likely to become addicts.
 
2014-03-12 12:59:03 PM  

seadoo2006: James10952001: Jim_Callahan: SF's problems with the homeless sort of boil down to:

1. Climate -- if you're homeless in SF, you don't really have to move out in the winter.

2. Throwing money at the problem instead of thinking it through -- They never add basic shiat like tracking or employment subsidies, it's always just buying people a sandwich or whatever.  Which fixes the problem for 6 hours at a time, sure, but you need to at least make a minimal effort to think long-term.  SF is in central CA, that's one of the deepest financial holes to climb out of in the US to begin with... they're not helping by having essentially no employment assistance or drug rehab in their programs.

I'm not so sure of that. The first time I visited SF I nearly froze my balls off. 92 degrees in San Jose, went downtown SF and it was 61. Next time I was there I made sure to carry long pants and a hoodie with me.

Uh, WHAT? That word you keep using, I do not think it means what you think it means.  61* is basically what the temps have been here for the past few days and people are out riding their motorcycles and jogging shorts.  61* is a nice spring day.  That's no where near 'freeze my balls off' territory ... now, these temps here a few weeks ago, came perilously close to that point ... especially with the wind chills nearing -50*F.


All is relative. Where I was staying, it was in the mid 90s and I was dressed appropriately for that range. When the temperature dropped by more than 30 degrees in the space of an hour and I didn't have any additional clothes to put on I felt COLD. I didn't mean that my balls were literally frosty.
 
2014-03-12 01:02:23 PM  

itcamefromschenectady: meat0918: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: By and large the homeless don't lack food, or shelter, or jobs, they lack adequate mental health treatment. Focus on the cause (mental illness) and you'll fix the symptoms (wandering the streets, eating food out of garbage cans, being unable to hold down a job)

Yeah, but that costs money, and what do you do when they stop taking their meds or going to therapy?  We cannot go back to the days of grabbing them and tossing them in an asylum to rot.

People don't usually stop taking meds if the meds work and make them feel better. The meds we have aren't expensive, they just don't work well or all the time. Fund research.


I don't have any data, just a couple of anecdotal experiences. My cousin as well as an old friend both have mental issues. Both have had meds that help, but both rarely take them because it makes them feel like not themselves. The friend has had severe depression and the meds did stop that, but completely flattened her personality too. No more deep dark swings but no more happy, fun quirky side either.
 
2014-03-12 01:10:18 PM  
tripleseven:Fiancee and I donate to the ASPCA, and Cancer charities yearly.

Trap, neuter, release?  There is a lot to be said for that.

/I got in SOOOOO much trouble for comparing Honolulu's homeless to stray cats.  But I will stand by it; feed them and they will congregate, bring friends, and reproduce.  And if you compare autism spectrum disorders and normal feline behavior....
 
2014-03-12 01:36:01 PM  

Laobaojun: tripleseven:Fiancee and I donate to the ASPCA, and Cancer charities yearly.

Trap, neuter, release?  There is a lot to be said for that.

/I got in SOOOOO much trouble for comparing Honolulu's homeless to stray cats.  But I will stand by it; feed them and they will congregate, bring friends, and reproduce.  And if you compare autism spectrum disorders and normal feline behavior....


I'm a big fan of trap, neuter, release programs. I've also adopted feral cats in need rather than just feeding them.
 
2014-03-12 03:21:24 PM  

James10952001: Laobaojun: tripleseven:Fiancee and I donate to the ASPCA, and Cancer charities yearly.

Trap, neuter, release?  There is a lot to be said for that.

/I got in SOOOOO much trouble for comparing Honolulu's homeless to stray cats.  But I will stand by it; feed them and they will congregate, bring friends, and reproduce.  And if you compare autism spectrum disorders and normal feline behavior....

I'm a big fan of trap, neuter, release programs. I've also adopted feral cats in need rather than just feeding them.


On my third and fourth cats, all rescues of one type or another.  Love cats.  Homeless, not so much.
 
2014-03-12 05:31:12 PM  
How much are a pack of smokes in CA these days?
ww1.hdnux.com
 
2014-03-12 06:38:50 PM  
I'm betting that they can find a solution at $24,000 per person. What's more they spend twice as much to keep someone in their county jail for a year.
 
2014-03-12 06:45:59 PM  
I've lived on the east coast and in the plains, and am currently in the mountains(CO).  The homeless go where they are welcomed.  That's it.  In KS, wichita would take the homeless and drive them to the douglas county line, drop them off and tell them, point blank, not to come back.  While I was there, Douglas county spent tens of million$ on shelters, job-seeking help, career advice centers and the like.  The homeless population kept rising, and none of the counselors could figure out why.  They clogged the downtown, sitting in coffee shops all day, driving away customers, and started killing the local businesses, but the local police couldn't do anything about it, as their hands were tied: the local park was the breeding ground, and due to several ordinances allowing tents(and a local church doing a tent-giveaway for the homeless), they started up their own community.  If you were homeless in Douglas county, you had 3-5 meals a day, as long as you didn't mind being preached at.  The problem with most of them was that they had no desire to better themselves.  They'd concoct the most outlandish tales to get money to feed their habits, but they never realized that if they spent half the effort they were spending on scoring the next hit, they'd have a job, a place to call their own, and a road to travel to self-sufficiency.  Most of them were fine with just existing, until they no longer exist.

Denver, much the same.  Adams county police will pick up the homeless, drive them to the denver county line and do the same as in KS.  Don't come back, we don't want you.  And the Denver homeless population is swelling.  I don't have much sympathy for them anymore: if they spent half the effort they use to get drugs, or to get drunk, on more constructive habits, they'd all be doing fine.  Instead, they're just existing.

/Get a job, damnit
//knows several employers who will take felons
///knows several felons, gainfully employed
 
Displayed 102 of 102 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report