Why doesn't the city just get rid of the homeless people? (Los Angeles: apartment, crime)

[quixotic59]

Originally Posted by NYCtoSF

That's because NYC also has a sizable population of weak, wimpy liberals just like SF.

The strong ones like me recognize and appreciate strength.

If by strong you are referring to body odor, I concur.

NYC is chock full of self indulgent, pretentious, selfish, cruel, uncaring, greedy, rude foul mouthed fools. I prefer the homeless, even the crazy ones to the Bloomberg-like slugs that have infested NYC. From what I have seen of San Francisco these past two weeks, it makes me sad to say that that same type of individual is taking root there also.
Hopefully, as mentioned before, they are the unfortunate "transplants" and will be put in their place by the local residents.
I would never wish on San Francisco, or any other city, the plague that has overwhelmed NYC.

[bigdumbgod]

Originally Posted by quixotic59

If by strong you are referring to body odor, I concur.

NYC is chock full of self indulgent, pretentious, selfish, cruel, uncaring, greedy, rude foul mouthed fools. I prefer the homeless, even the crazy ones to the Bloomberg-like slugs that have infested NYC. From what I have seen of San Francisco these past two weeks, it makes me sad to say that that same type of individual is taking root there also.
Hopefully, as mentioned before, they are the unfortunate "transplants" and will be put in their place by the local residents.
I would never wish on San Francisco, or any other city, the plague that has overwhelmed NYC.

HarHar...+1

You're not the only one getting sick of the plague of Jersey Shore Guidos infesting SF. Thankfully, they stay in SF, and generally don't slither south. Except for Satanic Row, but that's the South Bay's ever-reliable repository for human detritus.

[Ms Kitty 98]

Some homeless people make names for themselves after many years of hanging around in the streets of the city, like old captain Miley that would go to the VA for treatment then hang out in the Castro, or crazy Dane that would always be shouting at pedestrians on Market street. I'd see these people everyday on my way home from work that it became a customary daily encounter.

[Hybrid_Moments]

San Francisco needs to do something. The homeless situation is totally out of control. I lived there for a year, and honestly it was a big part of what drove me away. I am sick of San Franciscans shrugging it off by saying that there are homeless in all big cities. While obviously a true statement, it is not comparable at all (although Seattle comes close, and I assume Portland does as well).

I have no problems with the homeless. I'm the kind of guy who will talk to anyone, so I have had some pretty good chats with homeless people back on the East coast. However, engaging most of the homeless in San Francisco proved to be a mistake. There really is a difference between homeless and street people. Most of what San Francisco has are street people. They almost always turn out to be completely mentally unstable or a mean spirited hard drugs addict. The 20 something year old kid screaming insanity on the subway platform. The teenage runaway who assaults a pedestrian at random to exorcise some of her emotional pain. The man who beelined right for me on the street and began ranting about how he was going to rain blows on my head repeatedly after my mass suicide ritual. The woman who walked right up to my girlfriend and started talking about how she cut up her baby and could do that for her too. Or, as the perfect metaphor for my experience and an image that will be with me for the rest of my life, an unwashed man having a complete mental breakdown on the corner of some yuppie neighborhood in the Marina, while a young happy couple just pushes their stroller right by him without a glance.

No one ever seemed to acknowledge any of these events as out of the ordinary. My San Francisco friends would just shrug and say that it happens all the time. They claim to be defenders of the homeless, but refuse to even acknowledge their existence while passing them on the street. They just don't see it. I'm not trying to say that New York had it right with their homeless situation, they didn't. New York made a bad decision while San Francisco continues to do nothing. I'm not sure that continuing to ignore the problem while things get worse is so much better. So many of the people on the streets of San Francisco are not going to be able to get the help they need without drastic action. Instead, they suffer in a spiral of mental illness and drug abuse.

In the end, it was a prominent reason that I decided to leave San Francisco. It was just too sad.

[woxyroxme]

Originally Posted by NYCtoSF

Is there no desire within long time residents to rid SF of these people?

Originally Posted by mayorhaggar

arbeit macht frei

The scientist that knew the formula for zyklonB died, that's why.

How about supporting efforts to help the homeless turn their lives around if they need it. What about all the families that are suffering in this economy and living in cars with their kids? Do you really think they chose to do so?

[Klassyhk]

Originally Posted by NYCtoSF

SF has too many homeless people. I don't understand why the city doesn't just direct the cops to continually make their lives so difficult that they're forced to leave. This is what Giuliani did in Manhattan.

These people may be relatively harmless, but they're an eyesore and they add to the filth and degradation of urban environments. Is there no desire within long time residents to rid SF of these people?

I live in NYC and everytime I go to SF I always feel like it's "homeless headquarters". It aways looks like there's a homeless convention in town. My travel partner and I were afraid to let sundown catch us on the due to the overwhelming number of homeless people we had to pass through on our way back and forth from our hotel.

[sjnative]

Originally Posted by NYCtoSF

I actually agree with you on the different categories of homeless people. The first category - people hurt by the recession, should be helped, maybe through food stamps or extended unemployment benefits. The rest though - the hippies in their 20's and 30's - need to be taught a lesson.

Those are the people I despise as well. Theirs is a lifestyle and a culture, it seems. You see them in not only SF but in Santa Cruz, Berkeley and even in the Silicon Valley.

I don't share your mentality that they should be "taught" a lesson which is probably because I'm a soft-hearted Californian and a SFBA native. If anything, I partially sympathize with them as they're making a big mistake by wasting some of the most pivotal months and years of their lives.

Sympathy aside, these people are opting to both not work and to ask me to give me my money that I work for. No ******* way.

So, what should be done with these people? Should the police harass them to "run them out of town?" The latter is simply not part of the SF ethos.

Maybe the ethos should change, though, as it has been contributive to SF becoming such a freeloader haven...

It seems any generosity and good intent are exploited, and that's the case with SF and more generally with the SFBA...

Perhaps our liberal culture should continue its evolution toward a more responsibility-based culture...

[ambient]

Here's what actually should be done with the homeless:

1. For those who are drug addicts: force them into military-style rehab/work camps. It's the only way, because these people will never hold themselves to it.

2. For those who are mentally ill: get them into the hospital / asylum.

3. For those who are just plain lazy (this is a small minority): see #1.


Of course, this will never happen. So we can look forward to more crap on the BART elevators.

//www.city-data.com/forum/san-f...scalators.html

[Isebiel]

Nice post, sjnative.

There certainly are areas in the city that have few homeless/panhandlers/street people. I wonder what makes those areas different?

Hrm, now that I think about it, the less-homeless-prone areas seem to have less transit options, few-to-no tourists, and more hills? That's not very useful. Anything else? Maybe they're farther away from popular places to sleep (Tenderloin housing, or Golden Gate Park). Maybe availability of drugs? Though I suppose that's actually available anywhere. What would I know?

[7x7er]

I said this in the other thread but perhaps its more appropriate here:

Why doesn't the City finally come out and say it: If you are clean, come to a shelter and you'll have a place to sleep, shower, and "relieve" yourself. If you are an addict, aggressive panhandler or a criminal, you are not welcome here. Simple as that. No more sleeping in the parks or on the stoops of private homes or businesses. No more harassing citizens. We spend enough money dealing with the side effects of homelessness (e.g. cleaning sh** off the sidewalks and escalators) that surely they could divert that money towards shelters, and adopt a no-tolerance policy for anyone that chooses to remain a public nuisance.

My sympathy towards the homeless ends when they threaten the public safety. Tell Ed Lee or one of the supervisors to walk down Polk St from Civic Center to Clay on a Friday night. I just did that walk last weekend - no joke, there was at least 3 incidents where I felt the safety of myself and/or my girlfriend were seriously threatened. Some drunk guy who was probably mentally ill was threatening to hit me because he thought I stole "his book." The other day I had a friend who had a homeless man burn-out his cigarette on my friend's jacket. And then there's the stuff that's not necessarily threatening but just disgusting - people taking dumps on the sidewalk in broad daylight, people shooting up while sitting on the sidewalk, drunk homeless throwing up in the alleyways....

I'm not naive, I understand that in a dense city environment, you are going to come across some "interesting" characters. But this is getting ridiculous. City Hall needs to wake up.