[ahevia]

A large part of it is the long term NIMBYism that has plagued the area.(driven by that wealth gap you mention) Bay Area is beautiful to live in, it makes sense why so many choose to settle there, but many people want to restrict that access or make it more difficult.

Compound that over time, and you get what SF is. (The same is happening in other cities like Seattle). It’s heartbreaking that for so long the systemic issues of these places went ignored. From my understanding there is change, but it’s only come once problems like homeless have reached a tipping point instead of the resident preemptively addressing it years/decades ago.

[windows2020]

A wealth gap does not cause NIMBY and homeowners protecting their assets is not the reason these people are homeless. No one needs to live in SF. They're homeless because of their continued terrible decisions--something that could potentially be corrected via discipline. But instead, self deprecating behavior is not only condoned, but funded by tax payers.

[wbsss4412]

Homelessness is highest in the areas with the tightest housing markets.

It’s maybe comforting to think that “protecting your assets” isn’t harming anyone else, but there are plenty of places with higher rates of drug abuse than California, yet California has the largest homeless population in the country, followed by Hawaii and Oregon, two states that also have short housing supplies.

[tetris11]

Are you blaming people for not being able to afford housing, and not having the luxury of being able to try anew elsewhere?