[screye]

I am skeptical of podcasts which reach a conclusion that is always within the overton window of the era. "This incredibly complex question has a solution that perfectly fits within the moral-mores of this decade." It is the John Oliver phenomenon, that starts with a pre-determined conclusion and then exclusively looks at evidence supporting the pre-determined conclusion.

In SF you're either a local or a transplant. A person who gets evicted, is by definition financially insecure. A local when evicted, can always move back in with family/friend unless their community disowns them. A transplant in a low-income job, has no reason to continue living in SF if they moved here for work. They can always move back.

SF's homeless crisis (last 20 years) is entirely due to a rise in homeless people with mental illness & substance abuse. [1] The key issue is drugs. 100%. Housing is the 2nd most important issue, no doubt. But, any blindly adopted housing first policy from a place without the same drug issues will fail, and will fail miserably.

[1] https://dynomight.net/img/homeless-crisis/coc/CA-San%20Franc...

[makeitdouble]

If you're that interested in the question, why not give the podcast a fair listen and check their arguments directly ?

It's not some over the top over produced podcast like Last Week Tonight, and they're transparent about their sources and their opinion. The point of the show is to engage with verifiable information.