
A Plan to Flood San Francisco with News on Homelessness - aaronbrethorst
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/16/us/san-francisco-homelessness.html
======
raldi
This isn't the usual yada yada; it's a dramatic media experiment. Some quick
quotes from the article:

 _Advocacy is a longstanding taboo in American journalism, making reporters
and editors wary of discussing solutions to the problems they highlight in
their coverage.

[T]he question of whether San Francisco’s journalists are crossing into
activism has not come up, at least not in the initial meeting of news
organizations last month. [...] “It was sort of shocking that there was no
dissension [...] On the contrary, the conversation was, ‘Let’s do way more.’”

"Your job is to investigate solutions," she said. "People want to read about
how to fix broken systems."_

It's disappointing that most of the comments here are missing all of this, and
just focusing on the same old arguments about homelessness that could be made
on any of the articles that get written 25 times a week.

~~~
nihonde
"People want to read about how to fix broken systems."

I hope that's true, but I suspect that people prefer to read about how broken
things are, and point fingers at the perceived culprits. Fixing things leads
eventually to "slow news days".

Where I live in Japan, it's not uncommon for the news to spend a bunch of time
on a non-fatal car crash, or a string of petty thefts in convenience stores,
or a section of train tracks that needed to be fixed in a hurry. Every few
weeks, some government official will be disgraced for having a staff member
who spent a few dollars worth of public funds on a discretionary lunch or
something like that. Occasionally, someone will get murdered (usually small
kids, sadly) and that will dominate the news for a day, or a week. Celebrities
getting married. And then the horror show of news from other parts of the
world.

I'm exaggerating, but not by much. We should all be so lucky to have these
slow news days.

~~~
nihonde
By the way, I'm aware that Japanese media is tightly coupled to the ruling
party. You'll be hard pressed to find anywhere that isn't these days. What I'm
trying to get at is the focus on small stuff for lack of awful big stuff that
actually gets addressed. Keep in mind, we're talking about a place where a
_giant wave_ swept in and killed _twenty thousand_ people and their pets and
livestock, etc. in a few minutes, so it's not like it's trouble-free here.

------
pfarnsworth
I can't believe that SF spends $240M dollars per year on homelessness, and the
current environment is the outcome of all that money. Even worse, there is
zero accountability so there must be mass corruption and waste taking place
because based on what I see every single day, none of that money is being
spent properly.

[http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/S-F-spends-
record...](http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/S-F-spends-
record-241-million-on-homeless-6808319.php)

~~~
x5n1
If you were building cheap homes, say at 120k a pop, you could build 2,000
such homes every year. The total homeless pop in SF is 6,000. In three years
you could build 6,000 such homes in say Mississippi or some other middle of
nowhere place where land is very cheap.

~~~
logfromblammo
> _...building cheap homes, say at 120k a pop..._

Cheap homes are $20k a pop. $10k for materials, and $10k for contracted labor.
If you allocate another $20k for the land itself, and completing utility
connections to it whenever they do not already exist, that's $40k total.

If you had $240M to spend each year, you could build 5000 houses every year,
and have $40M left over for rudimentary commercial strips, administrative
buildings, libraries, schools, firehouses, and cop shops.

You could stamp out a new municipality _every year_ in 10 undeveloped adjacent
square-mile survey sections. 6400 acres would be 5000 for the houses, and 1400
for the commons and businesses. You don't even need to go as far as
Mississippi from SF. There are _huge tracts_ of undeveloped land on the Great
Plains between I-25 and I-35. They're actually cheaper than Mississippi,
mostly because they have a less reliable fresh water supply.

~~~
mcguire
" _...because they have a less reliable fresh water supply._ "

Congratulations! You've reinvented the reservation system!

~~~
logfromblammo
Now the only problem would be getting them from SF to the new town. There
would have to be some kind of road of wretchedness, or boulevard of
bitterness, or something...

------
chris_wot
All I know right now is that if I didn't have my family, I'd be homeless
myself right now. Right now I'm utterly, utterly depressed and finding it hard
to do anything. It's like trying to run through a vat of molasses, nothing
works very fast.

I'll probably be better after some more sleep, but I know the black dog and
anxiety is always just around the corner. It makes it very hard to do anything
let alone look for work. I really don't know how an already homeless person
with a worse mental illness does it. I fear they could be the most capable
person in the world, but if you hit a certain stage it's very hard to pick up
from.

It not self-pity either. I constantly tell myself that the feeling isn't
reality but just my brain being out of kilter temporarily. And I'm of course
correct. But if your head isn't ordered, no amount of positive thinking is
ever going to fix it. Sometimes all you can do is ride it out, but you can
only do this if you have a safe place to sleep, eat and keep yourself clean.
And that sure as hell isn't on the streets.

I hope that is never me, but sometimes I realise that I'm only a few steps
removed from the situation of those without anything. That's why I get
frustrated with so many attitudes towards homelessness and mental illness.
Saying that it's there own fault isn't terribly helpful. Maybe it is, maybe it
isn't. Maybe some homeless people choose to be homeless. Maybe some are lazy
and got into the situation through their own behaviour. But I'll hazard a
guess that isn't most people.

God help you if you ever hit rock bottom. God help you from the morally
outraged, fit and wealthy self-made man. In his eyes, you're worse than a
failure, you _deserve_ your situation.

~~~
dosgonlogs
I really appreciate you sharing your personal situation. That last line was
amazing. Some people lack compassion, spoiled by their own blessings that they
are oblivious to, because their pride hides those blessings from them. Their
ego tells them "I worked too hard and am too damn good at what I do, and too
damn smart and able to have my success be attributed to anything but my self".
Of course I may be citing an extreme example, but I have seen people espouse
this line of thinking, because you do see it promoted in subtle and less
subtle ways.

------
xchaotic
This is what struck me when I first visited SF - such a great country, all
this tech and you have homeless people on your office doorsteps? " "The
measure of a society is found in how they treat their weakest and most
helpless citizens." \- Jimmy Carter

~~~
raldi
To be fair, in a lot of cities where you _don 't_ see homeless people on
office doorsteps, it's not because they take better care of their most
helpless citizens, but rather because they crack down on them:

[http://www.nytimes.com/1999/11/20/nyregion/in-wake-of-
attack...](http://www.nytimes.com/1999/11/20/nyregion/in-wake-of-attack-
giuliani-cracks-down-on-homeless.html)

------
sna1l
Whenever somebody comes and visits, the first thing they mention about San
Francisco is all the homeless people. I hope, for the sake of homeless, that
this leads to some substantial, positive change, because currently it feels
like they are just being left out to dry.

~~~
BurningFrog
Clearly, wherever your guests are visiting from handles homelessness better.

~~~
T2_t2
Not if the reason there are none is because they die off each winter. Or
because the climate is too harsh in general. Or because of draconian laws that
force people to move on.

------
fiatmoney
"We need to be a hell of a lot more creative about how we solve this problem"

I think that's incredibly unlikely. "Homelessness" is not a technical problem,
it's a choice about desired tradeoffs. SF is squeamish about anything that
might actually work.

------
alva
> her station plans “blanket” coverage on June 29, but will not propose
> solutions.

Surely not blanket coverage to raise awareness? The problem is obvious to any
one who has spent a day in the city. I don't think this will elicit the call
to action they want.

From the relatively little time I have spent in SF and having lived in a
number of major cities, the challenges do seem unique. All of the biggest
cities have many homeless, however they are not routinely exposing themselves,
screaming, lashing out, openly injecting drugs and defecating to the extent
they do in SF.

I feel incredibly sorry for the homeless described above, it is really hard to
work out why the behaviours seem so common in SF and not other cities.

------
Overtonwindow
Forgive my pessimism here, but is this the fourth estate really attempting to
expose the problems of homelessness for a solution, or is this an attempt by
elites in the media to make the problem go away so they don't have to deal
with it. The opening lines where the reporter sees the couple having sex in a
tent. That just sets a negative tone for the whole thing. From there it just
sounds less like "we need to solve this problem" to "we need to do something
to get these people out of here.."

------
knightofmars
This article, from 1984, describes the policy changes that lead to the decline
of mental health institutions and the rise of homeless populations made up of
the individuals that were a part of those institutions.

[http://www.nytimes.com/1984/10/30/science/how-release-of-
men...](http://www.nytimes.com/1984/10/30/science/how-release-of-mental-
patients-began.html?pagewanted=all)

~~~
bobwaycott
FYI, the past-tense of the verb "lead" is "led", not its homophone noun
"lead".

~~~
knightofmars
Fast fingers lead to fast mistakes. Thanks. :)

------
jMyles
Although many people who live without a house are struggling, desperate,
addicted, and / or mentally ill, I also think that SF in particular has many
such people who are well-adjusted, happy, and simply don't care to live a
middle-class lifestyle.

For the former, let's get help. But for the latter, let's not judge.

------
vumgl
Anyone knows of a city that has successfully "solved" the homelessness
problem?

~~~
apenwarr
Utah did, or so they claim: [http://www.npr.org/2015/12/10/459100751/utah-
reduced-chronic...](http://www.npr.org/2015/12/10/459100751/utah-reduced-
chronic-homelessness-by-91-percent-heres-how)

~~~
fiatmoney
Easy enough to implement "housing first" where housing is cheap.

~~~
TulliusCicero
Housing would be a lot cheaper in SF if SF wanted cheaper housing.

Yes, they have geographical limitations on how much housing they can build
horizontally, but on top of those they also have strict self-imposed
limitations on how much they can build vertically.

------
erjjones
I couldn't even imagine trying to "fix" a homelessness crisis in SF.

From here in Indianapolis, IN when the whether turns cold for the winter many
homeless get out of town, turn to the shelters or other means of general
weather protection. While some will just layer up and deal with the cold. I
know a "homeless" man that chooses to be "homeless". He loves the freedom of
being able to go and do as he pleases. I would imagine SF has many who enjoy
the life style. How do you "fix" that? Besides flat out ordinances with police
backing...

Very dynamic issue to "fix".

------
Cozumel
"Ms. Kernan said her station plans “blanket” coverage on June 29, but will not
propose solutions."

Just trying to palm it off on everyone else, people know the system is broken,
they don't need more whiny ass bitching. They want solutions!

Edit: Actually reading further down one of the proposed 'solutions' is
building a mental hospital for them all!! That's just horrific, not all of
them are mentally ill and that's a dangerous judgement to make. They just need
help to get back on their feet. It could just as easily be any one of us in
their position!

------
marincounty
1\. Don't want them sleeping in tents on sidewalks? Provide a place to pitch a
tent that doesn't cost money--maybe rent a piece of land in another county,
and use tax payer money for security, etc. Other counties don't want them.
Problem.

2\. Want to avoid stepping on feces/urine? Build some restrooms? Oh no? They
will just have sex in them, or shoot up. Problem. (By the way, I can find a
restroom in that lovely city.)

3\. That study concluded most homeless are from San Francisco. "Oh, no they
arn't! It's a bad study!" Problem.

4\. "There here for the benefits?" What benefits? I only know of one benefit,
and that benefit was for homeless animals. It was shut down years ago.

5\. Every county in the Bay Area has been essentially harassing the Homeless.
In Marin County, where your bosses live; there's not one square inch of land
that's legal to pitch a tent, or sleep--that's free. If you have no money--you
are breaking some municipal/county law by sleeping.

6\. Our economy has desimated most jobs. The jobs left don't provide a livable
wage. This has been going on for 25-30 years. Problem.

7\. I haven't even got to drug use, or mental patients. Problem.

8\. Oh yea, why is the Bay Area going to do this day of homeless awareness
now? I think the writing us on the walls. I know Willie Brown is publically
wondering what SF is going to do with thousands of newly unemployed tech.
workers.

~~~
cname
> I can find a restroom ...

Did you mean "can't" or maybe "can never"? In most cities I've been to,
including SF, it's been really hard to find public restrooms.

------
nametakenobv
Carcetti for governor?

------
googletazer
You should have followed your instincts.

~~~
dang
Comments like this are not allowed here.

We detached it from
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11705156](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11705156)
and marked it off-topic.

------
beatpanda
"The 30 years of systematic disenfranchisement of poor people never really
bothered me," Ms. Cooper said, "But as soon as those disgusting people made me
personally uncomfortable, I knew we had to _do something_."

Wow. Golf clap for bravery there. Great work.

~~~
chris_wot
The problem with a systematic dismantling of welfare protection and the denial
of things like basic health care is that people who hit rock bottom have got
to go somewhere. And if you create a culture where things like a minimum wage
are seen as bad for business, you'll get people who don't make enough to live
a normal, basic life. They'll be one disaster removed from losing the lot and
the landlord turfing them into the streets.

When that happens, you can move them on, but they'll eventually grow to such
numbers there's nowhere to move them to. One day, you might hit a personal
crisis. Or your kids might hit that personal crisis. Or your whole family
might find themselves living in a car. Then _you_ will be the one being moved
on. And you will curse those who dismantled the welfare systems. You may well
be cursing yourself.

~~~
burfog
Yes, they do have to go somewhere. There is a solution for this in the movie
Soylent Green.

~~~
chris_wot
You really do _not_ want to give the Immigration Department any ideas like
this... :-)

In all seriousness, refugees are dying on Manus Island and Nauru already,
either from suicide, lack of medical care or from violence. In my view, it's
only marginally more safe in off-shore detention than it is on the very boats
the facilities are meant to be stopping.

------
azinman2
How about bussing back the homeless that cities across the US send to SF, or
if Regan wasn't dead sending them to his place since his defunding of mental
health flooded the streets with schizophrenics?

Edit: see my links below... Not sure why I'm getting down voted but these
things happened and contributed to the situation at hand. Homelessness is a
very complicated issue, I'm not suggesting this is the entirety of it.

[http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/09/11/2602391/san-
franc...](http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/09/11/2602391/san-francisco-
sues-nevada-patient-dumping/)

[http://www.povertyinsights.org/2013/10/14/did-reagans-
crazy-...](http://www.povertyinsights.org/2013/10/14/did-reagans-crazy-mental-
health-policies-cause-todays-homelessness/)

~~~
refurb
I suggest you do more research on how we ended up with this situation. Saying
"Reagan defunded mental health" gives you about 1% of the picture.

~~~
jonathankoren
Not really. Reagan did do that. He also made a lot of dick moves in the 1980s.
That's why he was controversial.

He also cut school lunches shortly after taking office which spawned the
famous meme "Ketchup is a vegetable."[1] Now I know some hagiographer of Saint
Ronald of Hollywood (Peace Be Upon His Name), will say that he never said
that. And they would be technically correct. The actual guidelines said that
schools "could credit a condiment such as pickle relish as a vegetable."

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketchup_as_a_vegetable](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketchup_as_a_vegetable)

~~~
refurb
You're conveniently ignoring the fact that how mental health issues were
treated were changing as well. Reagan was hardly at the forefront.

------
mynameishere
San Francisco has a wealth of homeless people because:

1\. The climate is good. 2\. The population is rich. and 3\. The government is
liberal.

It's a trifecta of bum-bait. No policy changes aside from going right-wing and
shipping them off to Austin or Charlotte (or whatever liberal sucker is next
down the list) is going to fix the problem.

~~~
beatpanda
No. Every bit of research on this issue discounts this theory. I'm sure it
makes you feel good to say it, but you're wrong.

~~~
Sacho
That's interesting - how do they discount these theories? Do you have an
example of such research?

~~~
beatpanda
Try reading the rest of this thread

