[arram]

I empathize with most of what he writes, but an irritatingly common pattern I notice when people criticize SV is pointing at destitute people next to wealthy people - as if proximity is the same as causality. California has more than its share of destitution, but fifty years of NIMBYs and catastrophically bad housing policy are a better candidate for blame. If you make housing expensive you shouldn't be surprised when people go unhoused and when everything becomes expensive because labor (which has to be housed) is expensive.

[elefanten]

It's not just housing supply, despite YIMBYs being the loudest voice in the room and housing supply is the most common presumptive scapegoat for all the poverty woes of SF.

There's another side. California is also much friendlier to the homeless and devotes way more resources to even trying to care for them. Meanwhile, the rest of America ships their homeless to a handful of destinations, with California's major population centers being top targets.

[fishermansporch]

Having lived there, I don't think you need to blame the people living in the houses to be disheartened to see that kind of wealth disparity in such stark contrast, regardless of the reasons. It's sad to live in a place which has so much money flying around and so many wealthy people that can't find a way to help the most vulnerable or the working class.

[pas]

They found a way: not actively hunt and harm them.