[robbrown451]

> If every city in the Bay would do the same, there would less incentive for homeless to congregate in SF.

So then any such program shouldn't be city specific. Why would residents of a city do things that result in more homeless in their own city? Basic game theory.

[losf]

It is not a game. The goal is not put homeless under the carpet. Because they are out of sight does not mean that the problem is solved.

SF is "the homeless capital of the United States"(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_the_United_Stat...). So, SF must be doing something right, for homeless to come in the City. I wish other cities would do the same, for the homeless's wellbeing not necessarily to attract more homeless. But if every city would do the same, homeless would not need to travel, so no more no less homeless. Right now some cities do nothing (or even make life more difficult) for homeless, hoping they leave...

I don't think it is the right strategy.

[losf]

"My point is that from many SF residents' perspectives, spending their tax dollars to make the city the "homeless capital of the united states" is not a smart strategy."

I guess this is where we disagree. As a SF resident, I want my tax dollars to serve every residents including the homeless. I don't want my tax dollars to be used to push the "problem" out.

[robbrown451]

Game Theory is not about games. Please don't blame me if the name is confusing to you. It is about strategies and incentives.

My point is that from many SF residents' perspectives, spending their tax dollars to make the city the "homeless capital of the united states" is not a smart strategy.