[Kalium]

> over 70% -- were living in San Francisco at the time they became homeless

People should be very, very careful with this number. The criterion used to measure it consider someone who has spent 30+ years in SF to be identical to someone who got off a bus from Nevada, spent a month in a subsidized SRO, and is now in a tent.

Which is to say 48hills is playing a little fast and loose with the truth, but you probably already knew they tend to do that.

[scelerat]

This is a quote from the source, the 2015 San Francisco Housing Count Report:

"Seventy-one percent (71%) of respondents reported they were living in San Francisco at the time they most recently became homeless, an increase from 61% in 2013. Of those, nearly half (49%) had lived in San Francisco for 10 years or more. Eleven percent (11%) had lived in San Francisco for less than one year. "

http://sfgov.org/lhcb/sites/default/files/2015%20San%20Franc...

So, no it's not "fast and loose," they actually did make a distinction between short- and long-term residents.

[Kalium]

You're absolutely, completely, 100% correct in your statements. The 2015 San Francisco Homeless Count Report makes precisely that distinction! They do so because it matters.

Should you choose to check it, you will find that the 48hills page you linked to does not make any such distinction. In fact, it omits the 49% figure altogether and states "That means seven out of ten homeless people used to be your neighbors – before the tech boom and the eviction epidemic".

I think some reasonable people might choose to describe this phrasing as perhaps potentially slightly misleading.