[supercheetah]

Can you cite any studies on that?

[dionidium]

You want citations for, "if you make something easier to consume, more people will consume it?"

[makeitdouble]

So, "If you make people's life better, more people will want a better life ?"

[dionidium]

No, because this formulation assumes we're starting with a fixed number of homeless people whose lives we're only making better. This is erroneous on two grounds: 1) it's not obvious that it makes their lives better in the long run, if it means they're less motivated to personally improve; 2) but second, and more important, the number of people who "need" these services is not fixed and policy can create more of them.

[seanmcdirmid]

Isn’t that just a rehash of “tragedy of the commons”?

[makeitdouble]

Tragedy of the commons comes from a lack of regulation. Put all the regulation you want, but make sure to guarantee your people live by a humane standard.

[seanmcdirmid]

If San Francisco is handing out free homes to all who come, how would that not be a tragedy of the commons situation? “Everyone can come to SF to live by a humane standard” will never work.

So what regulations did you have in mind?

[makeitdouble]

Why does the regulations have to be limited to San Francisco ?

You can't have it both ways, with freedom of travel between states and no federal intervention ever into how social policies are applied.

[hellojesus]

It's called moral hazard. It persists in any giveaway program.