A Little Perspective, Please

Just got back from a week in San Francisco, a city that is a lot like Austin except someone has secretly put caffeine in everything the populous consumes and tripled the rent on anyone that’s farther right than George McGovern to drive them out. Oh…and has the worst homeless problem in the country, if not the world.

SF is truly an international city, at least by American standards. One hears more languages and sees more ethnic diversity walking down the street than even in New York, where things often are a bit more segregated into ethnic neighborhoods. Yet for all of the international flavor, I’m not sure that very many residents ever leave the bay area. If they did, there might be a bit more diversity in thought about how to solve the proliferation of homeless people. Instead, it seems that the problem is made worse due to the lack of any dissenting voice.

(Austin, are you listening?)

First, most Bay Area citizens don’t seem to understand that this is NOT the way it is in all major cities; other places simply do not have the same numbers of homeless roaming the streets. But because SF citizens seem to think that this is just the way it is everywhere and because there doesn’t seem to be any diversity of political thought, their solution is “more of the same,” which is to throw more money at social services and give the underbelly a dollar or two when walking by. I find it sadly amusing that the same people who will accuse Bush of intractability can have this same “stay the course” mentality in the face of abject failure.

How bad is it? The homeless are sleeping in every 3rd or 4th doorway. They’re sleeping in the parks. They panhandle mercilessly. When they congregate in groups they intimidate passers-by. They stink because they see no reason to bathe, change clothes, brush their teeth, or wipe themselves. Despite all of the homeless shelters, government and private institutions that provide clothes, meals and job training and all of the dollars that are thrown at it, the majority refuse to work, help themselves or find any shame in being homeless. In short, no one seems to recognize the obvious: most of these people are not down on their luck, they are mentally ill and/or socially checked out. Like a family member with a drug habit, the solution is not to enable them. Yet, due to any voices to the contrary and, sadly, no conception of what things are like elsewhere, San Francisco is making their problem worse and worse. Societal dropouts actually MOVE to San Francisco so they can remain homeless. The weather rarely changes, so it’s liveable outside virtually year-round. And if things ever get too bad they can hit a shelter for a day or two to get themselves fed or get free medical care.

It’s unfortunate because SF has so many wonderful things about it; it’s easily the greatest culinary city in North America, if not the world; the green rolling hills, the bay, and the cliffs of the Pacific make it stunningly beautiful; it has managed to resist the homogenization that most of the U.S. has undertaken. And I'm not suggesting that all of these people get locked up or thrown into mental institutions (although that is the correct answer for some of them). But there has to be some accountability. Other cities have taken some novel approaches, such as making it a crime to panhandle without a license, having to check in with social services daily, etc. Once it's no longer easy and their presence isn't simply tolerated, it's amazing how many people move on. Again...99% of these folks are NOT people who are simply down on their luck.

I don’t see this changing any time soon, so like other travelers, I’ll continue to live with this as just one of the aspects of San Fran. But I can’t help but think how much they are hurting themselves economically by this systemic acceptance of the homeless as part of the landscape.