San Frans New DA Panders To Homeless Won't Prosecute Public Urination And Camping

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Edumakated

Short answer: correlation is not causation.

Better answer: You know as well as I do that’s a loaded question, and if I may say so, a foolish one because of fallacious construction.

My answer; The presence of a homeless drug addict does not negate economic facts; it’s an appeal to emotion.

You wrote a post stating that CA had this fifth largest economy in the world and that it's population density is high. You then stated that CA problem is that the economy is too good.

I am asking you to clarify how CA large booming economy and dense population creates homelessness.... That was your assertion, not mine.

I don't think the two are related in this instance. CA has a bad homeless problem because they encourage:

1) Illegal immigration
2) Rampant Drug Use
3) Decriminalization of certain behaviors
4) Mild weather

All these things taken together is why the homeless population is growing.

There are homeless in every major city, even conservative ones. The difference is that liberal cities subsidize and encourage it either directly or indirectly.

a reply to: Edumakated

Well, that’s slightly more reasonable, thanks for the rephrase.

I believe the facts here speak for themselves for the most part.

Population density is known to be a predominant factor in issues like homelessness, urban cleanliness, etc. San Francisco has the 2nd highest urban population density i the United States and the 2nd largest median household income.

You cannot debate any of those facts. If you’d like to discuss the connection I made which seems obvious, please do.

San Francisco is the topic, not political nonsense and clap-trap.

a reply to: underwerks

I lived in Seattle and just went back to visit. I saw the garbage all over the roads, I saw the graffitti on the road signs, I saw the garbage in the airport, I saw the broken walkways that were broken when I arrived and still broken when I left. I saw it for myself in Seattle. I also talked to friends who said if it weren't for their families, they would flee the city because it has become so awful, and such a cesspool.

I also have a relative in Los Angeles who complained about how the homeless camped in the back yards of their upper middle class neighborhood and the city would not allow them to force the people to move.

As for San Francisco, I think the widely published poop map, that shows where to avoid in SF because of the human waste on the streets.

Sorry you can live in denial as to the total cesspools these cities have become. SF has become so dangerous that many who used to convention there will no longer go there out of fear for the safety of their people.

Who runs these cities, these states? The Democrats, the liberals.

Our city could be a model, but the open disdain and actual hate the progressive/liberals appear to have for Christians and especially Jews make it difficult for religious organizations to help the homeless, they are actually unwanted. There ARE cities who have tried to arrest Christian groups for serving home made food to the homeless, the government would rather they eat out of the trash of restaurants because the food was made in a commercial government approved kitchen. My Christian friends in Seattle told me that this was true for their groups that try to serve the homeless.

It seems to me that progressive/liberals would much rather they appear to be empathetic by allowing children to freeze on the streets and doing nothing about it so the children stay with their parents; they appear to be empathetic by not forcing people strung out on the streets to get help, but let them lay there with a needle in their arm out of being kind; why? Because progressive/liberals feel it is the governments job, they don't want to get their hands dirty, so they let the people spread disease among themselves and on the streets out of being sympathetic to their cause, really?

This is awesome!!! Its gonna be bechelor party heaven....think about it...go rage for the weekend...poop and pee on Pelosis driveway.....no trouble!!!!!

Wish I was 25 again.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
California’s economy is the world’s fifth largest.

California is the most populous US State.

San Francisco is the second highest population density by city in the United States (superseded by NYC).

Source

San Francisco has the second highest household income by population density in the United States (superseded by San Jose).

Source

You can look up the first two on your own; I consider them accepted facts or common knowledge.

Population density creates the problems we see in CA particularly in San Francisco. See also New York City, Chicago, etc.

Contrary to the ridiculous comments in this thread, California’s “problem” is that its economy is too good.

Sorry California ranks 42nd out of 50 in economic health.
www.mercatus.org...
www.ppic.org...

California is a place unlike any other on the Globe. It boasts perhaps the greatest natural resources of any state along with shining high-tech industries. However, like many good economic stories, government policies threaten its future. Indeed, its government has made California unsustainable.

www.ppic.org...

It's time to let California go their own way and become their own country like they want. Their social policies are hostile to flyover middle America and it's values.

The leadership of California seem to loathe the USA as a racist, sexist, homophobic, country. They say that was founded in slavery and racism and is still one of the worst countries in the world, responsible for most of the troubles in the world. If that is how they feel as their social media tweets/etc seem to strongly imply. Then we should let them go. Then they can keep the homeless who have flocked there due to their "compassionate" policies. Then they can keep all the people who have flooded the country with no job skills, and illegally, and keep on not prosecuting illegals who murder and rape and steal. They can have their idea of compassion and what makes a good nation.

But isn't unemployment at an all-time low? How could the homeless problem POSSIBLY be getting worse? Hmmmm...

Ummmm because the reporting requirements have changed?!
If you give up looking for work....you aint counted. Cool.huh. 🤔🤔


a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

a reply to: The2Billies

You're citing politically biased constructed arguments utilizing cherry-picked examples.

You're out to make ill-supported partisan arguments.

I noted the relevant causes in regard to the topic.

You're evangelizing

originally posted by: The2Billies
It wouldn't take much fact checking on your part to figure out what city it is.

How so? You won't even say what state it's in.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Always interesting when somebody says “I won’t tell you the city I live in because I fear for my safety.....but I’ve given you enough information that you could like, totally figure it out super easy because I’m not THAT worried about my safety.”

I’d love to know where this utopia of conservatism is, too, because it sounds a hell of a lot better than the liberal cesspool I’m currently in.

a reply to: Shamrock6

I'd like to know since I'm going to nominate them for the Nobel Peace Prize for solving homelessness via politics.

SF…. Won't Prosecute Public Urination And Camping


sounds like the way Bombay once used to be.

and that Sanctuary City (SF) finds that policy Sustainable … at least until the taxpayer segment abandons the place with only the extreme capitalist driven remaining as holdovers...

Awaiting for the Property Tax Auctions so as to hopefully pick up primo properties for peanuts of unpaid annual taxes

I believe residents like the Elites, who are basically immune from the homeless urinaters…. have been Debriefed on making the most of this opportunity to pick up the pieces after the middle class populations pull up stakes, abandon their properties, flee to neighboring States with Jobs & Homes & Practical Social Norms to live in.


the Elites have planned to become Land Barron's for a long time now.... this type of legislation will make the taxpayer exodus happen faster yet

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Edumakated

Well, that’s slightly more reasonable, thanks for the rephrase.

I believe the facts here speak for themselves for the most part.

Population density is known to be a predominant factor in issues like homelessness, urban cleanliness, etc. San Francisco has the 2nd highest urban population density i the United States and the 2nd largest median household income.

You cannot debate any of those facts. If you’d like to discuss the connection I made which seems obvious, please do.

San Francisco is the topic, not political nonsense and clap-trap.

Is it population density or that the most densely populated cities tend to be more liberal?

Are we talking homeless per capita? It is obvious that highly populated cities would have a lot of homeless as there are more people, so not really sure why pointing out these cities are high density is so insightful. However, I'm sure smaller cities like Detroit or even some rust-belt cities, there can be pretty sizable homeless populations per capita.

a reply to: Edumakated

If you wanted to talk about relating political ideology to economic performance, I suppose we could do that. I try to avoid partisanship unless it serves some purpose. It doesn’t here.

To me the core matter seems straightforward. SF is the second most densely populated city in the US. Housing availability is a factor and you've pointed out some important factors in a recent conversation we had regarding zoning etc. But the real problems that you guys are lamenting about are a direct result of population density as seen in NYC, for example, although New York has addressed many of those issues since they've experienced them over a longer period.

ETA I didn't claim this to be insightful, simply the most reasonable.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
But isn't unemployment at an all-time low? How could the homeless problem POSSIBLY be getting worse? Hmmmm...

It's the liberals dude. Anything bad that has ever occurred is because of the evil liberals.

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
But isn't unemployment at an all-time low? How could the homeless problem POSSIBLY be getting worse? Hmmmm...

It's the liberals dude. Anything bad that has ever occurred is because of the evil liberals.

glad you are finally coming around....

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Edumakated

If you wanted to talk about relating political ideology to economic performance, I suppose we could do that. I try to avoid partisanship when possible.

To me the core matter seems straightforward. SF is the second most densely populated city in the US. Housing availability is a factor and you've pointed out some important factors in a recent conversation we had regarding zoning etc. But the real problems that you guys are lamenting about are a direct result of population density as seen in NYC, for example, although New York has addressed many of those issues since they've experienced them over a longer period.

ETA I didn't claim this to be insightful, simply the most reasonable.

I am still not seeing any connection. Here is what I do see...

We have FIVE major cities that all are experiencing very similar homeless problems - encampments, public defecation, rampant drug use, etc. Those cities are LA, San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, and now Austin.

While SF is densely populated, you can't really claim that the others are.... so to me that I fail to see the connection.

What I do see is five cities that are overwhelmingly liberal and that have all approached the problem in the same manner. The results speak for themselves.

a reply to: Edumakated

You’re dealing with the question in a narrative sense.

I’ll pull the numbers together and get back to you.

a reply to: Edumakated

Hypothesis;

Large government programs attract and actually increase the homeless population.


Do cities with low homeless populations have smaller local government programs?

Do populations follow programs or do programs follow populations?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Edumakated

Hypothesis;

Large government programs attract and actually increase the homeless population.


Do cities with low homeless populations have smaller local government programs?

Do populations follow programs or do programs follow populations?

I think you create an environment in which you allow it to thrive.... all those cities:

1) Sanctuary cities that attract illegal immigrants (overwhelming poor and more likely to wind up homeless).
2) Encourage rampant drug use with free needles, etc
3) Decriminalized quality of life ordinances - allowing encampments, public urination, etc
4) Some what mild weather

I think it has more to do with the first three.