Sure. I'm talking about "soup kitchens". They really are plentiful. I even know of one that only served vegetarian food, and always had a full loaf of bread you could take with you after your meal. There are four or five just in the TL. I found during my stint I would just walk from one to the other and sit for coffee and snack.
Some shelters are associated with a parent (church etc.) that also provides food, but they're typically separate. Seriously, the only people who could possibly be hungry are invalids or children that can't get to the food banks. Any person that can walk around begging for change could easily walk a few blocks for a healthy hot meal. "Help, I'm hungry" is an outright lie---every time--plain and simple.
I make a point of carrying a few Cliff Bars in my backpack, to offer to people who ask for money. Some people turn them down, but a number also happily accept them.
There are no good solutions, but this is the best compromise I've come up with so far.
As someone who hasn't spent much time in SF but plans to move there very soon and doesn't want to live off of ramen, I genuinely want to know: where does one get those free meals?
I've had the thought a few times while going for broke on my startup. The food was totally fine, and the shelters generally safe, but, well, the clientele was not generally people you'd wish to associate with.
Food, even healthy food, can be cheap if you're willing to spend a bit of time preparing. I'd cook a pot of beans before hitting up soup kitchens.
A couple of years ago, a couple getting their food from trashcans around here got poisoned by the cooling agent you put in cars. They were found in their apt. a couple of weeks later. The hypothesis was that someone was tired of having them going through their trash.
They were not homeless. A criminal investigation was made. It is used as a scenario in school, and that's how I know about it. The pictures were... "interesting".
Not saying it's common, but if I ever have to get my food from trash cans I will make damned sure that it's at least properly sealed.
What's remarkable about this is how the poster finds these casual encounters with homelessness "unremarkable". No other western city that I have visited has the massive, in-your-face homelessness as SF.
I don't know enough about the causes of this phenomenon in SF to suggest what can be done about it; I'm sure they are complex, multi-factorial and politically fraught, but the level of homelessness in SF and (almost) everyone's blase acceptance of it shocks me every time I visit.
In the mid-90s, when I lived in New York, panhandlers would follow me several blocks while negotiating for change (you got tokens? I take subway tokens!). In Paris in the mid 80s, the same thing happened constantly in the metro station. Panhandlers would also come up to you while you were stuck in traffic, ask you to roll down your window, and try to bum money off you. It was constant. I was punched by a bum in Dublin when I didn't give money.
SF is bad, but I'm always a little surprised when people say it's somehow unique. There does seem to be a more seriously mentally disturbed element to SF, though, I will give you that.
I've heard NY has cleaned up, and I didn't get spanged last time I was in Paris as far as I remember (though someone did try the old trick of pretending to "find" a ring, ask if it belonged to my wife, insist on handing it to her, and then asking for money).
As a parisian currently living at Montreal, there is a huge difference between the two mentalities. There is homeless people at Montreal too, but .. well .. most of them are civil : they don't try to annoy you to get money (some of them even say "Have a nice day" when I decline).
One of the thing which surprised me when I first used the montreal subway was that the 'musicians' were actually real musicians, played only at some places, and did not try to get money by playing so bad that you only wanted them to stop. When I came back to Paris during holidays, it was horrible to see again these guys with their horrible speakers, horrible musics and horrible voices.
tl;dr Montreal is a very nice city. Why can't we find such nice behavior in other cities ?
In some cities it is illegal to just busk anywhere. I think in Munich you had to get a license to play anew every day, which means getting up very early and queuing at some office (never did this myself). Certainly no licenses for playing on the subway are given out.
though someone did try the old trick of pretending to "find" a ring, ask if it belonged to my wife, insist on handing it to her, and then asking for money
I don't understand this, and if someone did that to me, I would be utterly confused. What's the basis for giving someone a ring that they would know isn't theirs?
To induce a feeling of obligation. I accepted a gift, now I should give a gift in return. This way, they trade a ten cent ring and ask for a 10 euro note in return.
She tossed the ring on the ground so it clattered and jumped up, "is this yours? Oh, well you keep it...", you know, that kind of crap.
The main cause is pretty simple. The police in San Francisco just do not bother them in certain neighborhoods. In most other cities police routinely pick up the homeless and dump them some place far.
So the absence of homeless is usually not a sign of better humanity, it is usually a sign of cruelty. This is especially the case in the US. There are other countries where they have better treatment for poverty and mental illness (most homeless are mentally ill to some extent) where the absence of homeless on the city streets may mean actual absence of homeless. But this is not the case in the US.
Thus, even if the sight of homeless in San Francisco is so terrible, one should keep in mind that San Francisco provides the best treatment for them in America.
I used to believe this based purely on having heard it all my life. But a friend of mine recently made an interesting point: he asked me what race homeless people are. My answer (at least here in LA) was that they're almost unanimously black or white. Never Asian. Never indian. Rarely Mexican.
I countered that it could be due to Asian and Mexican cultures being more culturally inclined to take care of their own, but I haven't fully convinced myself that that's the case.
My friend who made this point happens to be black, and his explanation was that having grown up in a black neighborhood, he noticed that black and white people have a sense of entitlement that other races don't often have, both for reasons that don't need explaining, and that that type of attitude begets unfortunate circumstances. I don't know whether I entirely agree with this point either, but it certainly makes you think.
It's very possible I'm off base here. I'm going purely on observation and anecdotal things. Do you happen to have any hard stats off hand?
Edit:
I looked it up. You're right in that Latinos hold the second highest percentage of homelessness at 33%, but when you consider population size, it sort of becomes irrelevant. Latinos make up 47% of the total population in LA. Blacks make up only 9% however they're a full 50% of the homeless population. This means that per capita, Latinos are 5 times less likely to be homeless than blacks.
The SF Chron (check the earlier links) distinguishes between "chronic homeless" and "hardcore homeless". Chronic homelessness appears to be more of an economic condition related to poverty. "Hardcore homelessness" is more severe condition, a permanent and very harsh life on the street, often related to addiction and mental illness. You might not even notice the chronic homeless in your day to day life.
Apparently, San Francisco does stand out in the high incidence of hardcore homelessness. Supposedly SF and NY have the same number of "hardcore homeless", even though SF has about 1/10 the population (though any time you get into these ratios, you have to remember that SF is a small geographic region and population within much larger bay area - if you drew a 48 square mile border around an urban core in NY or LA, the numbers probably wouldn't look so dramatically different - my guess is that SF would still look bad, but not by anywhere near this order of magnitude).
I would venture to guess it has something to do with blacks having historically been isolated from the opportunities that other races have had, and that even though things have improved, we're still seeing the lasting effects of centuries of prohibitive behavior.
Come to think of it, I've never met a homeless Asian on Indian before. I see plenty of Asians working their asses off in shitty conditions in chinatowns to feed their kids so they can go off to college some day. You're right, it does make you think.
"Yet there are homeless Asians. Isabelle Hsu reports in the Pacific News Service that in San Francisco alone there are approximately 6,000 plus people living in the streets. She quickly adds that this is a very rough estimate. Ed Jew (the only Chinese American on Mayor Gavin Newsom’s committee to end chronic homelessness) explains that the official estimate of Asian homelessness is probably low because of cultural sensitivities. It is also a matter of saving face: homeless Asians refuse to go to shelters and admit to their homelessness."
There is some truth to this:
"According to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 20 to 25% of the homeless population in the United States suffers from some form of severe mental illness."[1]
Mental disorders prevent people from carrying out essential aspects of daily life, such as self-care, household management and interpersonal relationships. Homeless people with mental disorders remain homeless for longer and have less contact with family and friends. Any type of help from friends and family can be misinterpreted and further pushed towards the cycle of poverty.
you are doing it wrong. very wrong, if you think that's a police problem.
recently the former, most retarded, mayor of Sao Paulo used police on the city's 'tenderloin' (called cracoloandia ...literal translation to crack-land... you get the idea) it resulted in a city wide chaos as those figures, usually restricted geographically and living with their own morals and codes, scattered all over the place and freaked out when found in a situation worse than they were already at, resulted in far worse crimes than the littering they were committing before.
This problem is in no way unique to San Francisco; our engineering team has offices in San Francisco, Seattle (Pioneer Square) and Vancouver (Gastown) -- and we can collectively report that there are large, hardcore homeless populations in all three cities.
I think you see more homeless on the west coast because it's a little easier to make it through the winter without consistent shelter there. (Compared to, say, Minneapolis.)
I haven't actually compared against other places on the continent that have year-round temperate climate, so this is just conjecture.
I remember the Cleveland Plain Dealer had an article a few years back that said the October count of homeless they (some city or Ohio government entity) did every year, the numbers had dwindled to essentially zero, because there were so many unoccupied houses to take shelter in.
I think SF is stuck with a perfect storm of "landed gentry" conservatives that don't want to pay for homeless services, sympathetic liberals whose spare change enables drug addicts, civil rights activists that fight city hall to protect people's "right to be homeless", and the so-called "homeless industrial complex."
A few years ago, the local PBS station had a TV show about SF's homeless problem. People migrated to SF because the city (until "Care Not Cash"?) handed out monthly cash stipends. Emergency rooms would be crowded with drug ODs on the first day of each month. PBS also spent a few days with one panhandler in particular. He received handouts that would have added up to $70K/year, if he didn't spend it all on heroin.
> No other western city that I have visited has the massive, in-your-face homelessness as SF.
SF is unique not in the size of the homeless population, but in its distribution.
The linked study refers to metropolitan areas (thus including Oakland as part of the SF Bay), but SF ranks 12th in the nation behind Tampa, Seattle & San Jose among others [1]
In both DC [21] and to a lesser extent Seattle [8], for instance, you could quite conceivably live, work and play in areas without visible signs of homelessness (including the commute in between).
In SF, of course, this is impossible. Certain parts of Market street (bordering on the Tenderloin) are about as run down as a major downtown area gets in the developed world.
I can't speak for most other cities on the list. But in DC you can from far out wealthy suburbs (e.g. Loudoun County to the White Houss and see homeless. It certaintly is not as prevelant as I've seen in Tenderloin/SF but its not hidden either.
There are plenty of homeless in Washington, and downtown some are fairly aggressive in their panhandling. I'm not aware of them in the suburbs, as mentioned by jeffd703, but then I don't get out Loudoun County much.
There are plenty of homeless in DC, but the vast majority are well out of sight in major business and residential districts. It's in part a "virtue" of the intense economic (and racial) segregation in the district.
I was born and raised in DC and have lived there for the last 6 years, working and living downtown. Of course there are homeless people (as opposed to the bizarrely antiseptic Palo Alto, for instance), but the level of visible homelessness is not in the same zip code (let alone ballpark) as SF. Honestly, it's not even close.
Honolulu comes close. As you say, it's complex in origin, but contributing factors are the constant influx of outside money (tourism), significant pedestrian traffic, and moderate climate (you can live outside year-round and the weather will never be completely unbearable, or kill you outright).
It seems nobody has mentioned the climate. San Francisco is temperate and mostly warm – you can be outside all year.
I spent a lot of time in Montreal. There are homeless people, but they tend to be more organized. You don't want to weather a Montreal winter unprepared. I've always wondered how many of them die in the cold every year.
More like mostly chilly. SF doesn't have the temperature extremes of the Montreal, but you still have to wear a sweater most of the year. You can always spot the tourists by their shorts and newly bought "San Francisco" emblazoned sweatshirts.
Local law enforcement has told us that, off the books, many East coast cities have actually paid to fly their homeless out of their areas into other parts of the country, California (namely San Francisco) because of their homeless-friendliness.
People wonder what happened to all the crime and homeless in NYC? They were flown out west.
Citation definitely needed. I don't see how cities would pay thousands of dollars to fly the homeless out of town. Most of the time they are mentally ill, and simply don't have the financial resources to get better. I'm not of perfect mental health, but I have the resources and the support network to make myself normal, where as the less fortunate do not. I know this is completely off topic, but everyone has I just don't give a shit any more point and say fuck it I'll live on the streets.
Maybe not flown, but could certainly have been bused, and how much exactly do you think it costs to provide benefits to homeless on a per capita basis? I'm not saying it's true. It's only what I've heard, and the economics of it work out, even if they were flown.
For what it's worth, the plane ticket seems suspect to me too, as you usually require an ID to fly, which most homeless are without.
I believe the solution to the homeless problem lies somewhere between a mental institution and a halfway house. A place where the homeless can receive ongoing care in a safe but controlled environment. But as a sacrifice, they lose freedom. These people need care and help, but some of them can also present a danger to society. That's the reality of it. I don't think people mind too much a person asking for a bit of help on the street, but when they accost you, they need to be managed.
Of course, if someone was willing to take them in and assume full responsibility for them, that'd be even better.
Several years ago I sat next to a homeless guy on a Southwest flight from Burbank to the East Coast. He told me he had just been released from prison, and California was paying for the ticket to fly him out to Rhode Island to live with his son. This might have more to do with prison than homelessness, though.
i can't believe that. it fails the conspiracy secrecy test - there would have had to have been a bunch of people involved and eventually there would have been a scandal.
my bet is that we have mild winters in California that are much less Darwinian.
"New York has found a novel, if expensive, way of dealing with its overcrowded shelters – buying one-way tickets for homeless families to leave the city."
From that article: “Families can qualify for the tickets if they have a relative in another part of the world, including the US, who says they are willing to house them.”
NYC also gets its share of people from outside the NYC region who actually fall for the myth of NYC as ultra-socialist nirvana.
There was an episode of South Park based on this. They specifically send all the homeless to California (because it's "super cool to the homeless"), too.
While living in Japan, I've heard from numerous sources that Tokyo has gotten in trouble in the past for purchasing one-way bus tickets to Osaka for the homeless. (I'm having trouble finding citations, though.)
I didn't notice the homelessness to be nearly as bad as Vancouver when I visited SF in 2011. Maybe we missed it, but we stayed in a hostel on Mason Street and walked around a fair bit.
This is what that spot looks like every day, except the lines of homeless stretch much further then the picture shows. After that section of the street you get corners filled with hookers and junkies.
Or you can be a bit more subtle about it, Suburban Texas Style™, and simply design the homeless away:
1. No public transportation.
2. Unreasonable distances between gathering places (e.g. grocery stores) and often long stretches of no sidewalks.
3. Public park curfews with police sweeps of said parks at night.
No way to get in, no way to get food, no way to stay. When I realized, as a teenager, that this was why I was not used to homeless people, I was a little perturbed.
Except for #3, I don't think these measures could be considered intentional. However, I imagine they have a large effect and go a long way to explain the difference between SF (or NY) and most of the midwest/mountain/central US.
Westwood in LA was pretty similar. I would guess the climate and the excess change is the primary draw.
As a visitor to the US, I find the homeless there very emotionally saddening.
I had a morning routine in LA where the same guy would greet me and everyone around. I just started buying him breakfast each day and he was always very appreciative. Saw a lot of people grabbing food out of garbage cans. Another guy with no legs crossing 10 lanes of traffic. Just a painful reminder of how much harder life could be.
I wasn't as regular with my routine in SFO and admittedly moved apartments further from the tenderloin. I ended up scaring more homeless whenever I walked through the tenderloin than scared me. But I still found it depressing to have to face that each day when I knew I could make a meaningful difference to many of the people I saw.
Has Westwood gotten worse since I graduated UCLA in 2010? By my memory, there were only several decipherably-homeless individuals wandering about. In most cases, they would talk at me, mumbling, and didn't actually talk TO me in a real attempt to get anything. I would even say downtown Palo Alto is worse than Westwood. The rest of LA is pretty bad, but Westwood was a far cry away from any of it.
Westwood is absolutely nothing like downtown SF in this regard - its homeless population consists of about a half dozen friendly transients and a bird lady. I have no idea where this poster lived in SFO but he clearly has never been to the Tenderloin.
Didn't spend much time in the rest of LA, but I was in westwood for 8 months in 2011. There was less than the tenderloin, but most of the streets with shops had a homeless on every corner. I would walk by 5-10 on my way to grab lunch or dinner.
You are exaggerating. I live in Westwood, have lived in the area for 15 years. Also spent quite a bit of time in SF.
There is absolutely no comparison between the two places. Even in Westwood Village you could go months without being hit up by a homeless person for change. Now, maybe you were in a hot spot where a few hang out regularly, but they are not everywhere by any stretch of the imagination. They're also nothing like the aggressive homeless population in SF. The police here are very quick to crackdown on any kind of aggressiveness.
If you lived in rural Idaho I could see how you might think Westwood had a lot of homeless people -- anyone from SF would think there were none.
I said that there were less and I would agree the ones in SF are more aggressive. I fail to see why there needs to be a distinction between 20 homeless on a block and 10. If you have 10 homeless living in your block, you have a problem.
I agree about West LA completely, but I feel people are missing the bigger story about LA's homeless problems: skid row. I volunteered at a soup kitchen there for a few months several years ago, and it was as bad as the worst I've seen in SF, except more concentrated, with less normality in the immediate vicinity. This means there's less harassment, but perhaps even more complete, down and out, blatant drug use and prostitution.
But did they harass you at all? Downtown Palo Alto has one on every street corner too, and they don't bother anyone. But Tenderloin... after walking through Westwood and PA for several years now, I still just plain don't feel safe in the Tenderloin at all.
I know your comment is regards to West Coast cities, but if you've been to the East it's quite noticeable in many cities (Baltimore, Philadelphia, Detroit, among many) - definitely not a uniquely SF phenomena. Did you know that in 2011, there were 46.2 million US residents at or below the poverty line [1]? That's 15% of the US population. And as much as 10% of the poor, or 1% of the US population is homeless [2].
London has a pretty bad homelessness issue. There are lots of charities and voluntary contributions that attempt to address the issue but its a hard problem to solve.
London also has quite fragmented social ghettos. In most cities you have richer areas and poorer areas, London broadly has this, but has pockets of wealth in the poorer areas and pockets of poverty in the rich areas. To a much greater extent than I've seen in any city I've been to.
I have this reaction every time I visit a west coast city. So far, that includes San Francisco, Portland, and Seattle.
I've always assumed it has something to do with the climate being more amenable to homelessness. But thinking about it now there must be some other political or structural reasons at play.
I find it interesting that we have some homeless people even in Germany, where social payments exist by law and (evidently almost) everyone in need would get some money for living and even payed the rent of a home.
This is just me, and my approach to the homeless or destitute, but if someone asks me for money, the answer is some form of no (if I even acknowledge the asker). Yeah, you tell me you're hungry or whatever, but I'm not going to risk participating in your next fix.
If they ask me for food, however, it's always a yes, assuming I can do it right then (not late for something, have money or my card on me or whatever). You wouldn't believe how rarely that actually happens.
I don't spend a lot of time in the Tenderloin — though I do pass through it fairly regularly — but actually being asked for food is pretty much the opposite of "unremarkable" in my experience.
I tried to take this attitude a while ago, but after being abused and accused of mistrust too many times (the homeless aren't actually starving in Australia) I returned to ignoring such people.
The worst was when a couple implored me to give them some money for accommodation, as they had been evicted. I said "Sure, let's go to a hotel right now and I'll check you in." They called me a bunch of expletives and stormed off.
Same. A homeless guy walked by an alley near my house once and asked for money for food. I walked inside and came out with a half-dozen cans of tuna for him, and he started swearing and saying he didn't want "that cat food". I just stared at him, said "I eat this stuff. If you don't want it, then nothing for you." The guy just flipped me off and walked away. Good deed averted.
You did the right thing; that person was trying to score. I also offer them food only. If they don't accept it, it's usually because they are junkies and want someone to extend their habit.
I used to subscribe to this idea as well, until a friend of mine told me this: "Have you thought of the fact that you're enabling people to be homeless, thereby making the problem worse rather than better?". This really struck me, since I agreed... I'd rather work on the causes than the symptoms.
If you're trying to maximize the good your dollar can do, you're probably better off giving to a charitable organization. A thrifty homeless guy might be able to feed himself for $2, but the cost of a stomach full of soup, bought in bulk and prepared by volunteers, is likely to be considerably less.
My church supports a food pantry that prepares meal packets for malnourished people around the world. Boil a few cups of water, mix in this bag, and you have a meal for 6 people that can sustain them for a day.
Total cost? $0.50
I'm from IL, but I'd be willing to wager there's nowhere in SF a homeless person can buy a single meal for a single person with two quarters.
Which isn't to say you shouldn't buy the guy a sandwich. There's a value to that person's life that makes it worth the cost at much higher prices. It's just that, in today's world anyway, you don't have to spend all that much to make a difference.
I know someone who's been experimenting with the same rough idea, but trying to be a bit proactive about things by putting together small kits of food/water/stuff (granola bars, raisin packets, water bottles, gift cards for chain restaurants, socks, toiletries) and keeping a few in the car to just hand out when he gets asked.
This is in LA, where you're usually in the car when you see unfamiliar people (down on their luck or not), so YMMV in places like SF where foot traffic is more the rule and you may not be habitually carrying lots of extra baggage.
Carrying a Subway gift card specifically to give away might work out, though. Maybe pair it with the card of addresses for local help institutions (shelter, food, addiction treatment, mental health if we still have any of these) for extra mileage.
Food isn't as fungible as change, but there's still opportunity cost. Each dollar they don't have to spend on food is a dollar that can be spent on drugs instead.
True, but it's not like they're eating at expensive restaurants. Anyone can get a full stomach with $2 or $3 at a McDonald's or Taco Bell. And just an hour of begging on a major pedestrian area will get you enough for that, a pack of smokes, and a bottle of whisky.
I think a lot of beggars do it not just for the money, but because they like interacting with people. So it's good to acknowledge them. Nothing wrong with offering some food if it's done in a way that gives the person some good interaction. And, anyone could get tired of eating in the same places, so it can be a treat.
But money should absolutely never be given. My technique, instead of lying and saying "I don't have anything," is to simply say "I can't help you."
I think you're right. Often times people in the Tenderloin will ask me for the time. When I give it to them they say "Thank you" and move on, with no followup request for money or food.
It's possible they genuinely need to know the time. It's also possible they are trying to get me to take out my cell phone. But I think the most likely answer is that they want to have a normal human interaction.
I think all of us battle with those feelings. In this circumstance, what you did was the right thing.
On one occasion, I was driving through on Market St towards Castro when I saw a disheveled younger man in his twenties with a sign "Don't want money. Just food." As I pulled up to a stoplight, I turned to my girlfriend and asked, "do we have anything?" And we did - two bagels and a croissant. We didn't mind going hungry because once we gave him the food, he did a giddy little dance... as if there were nothing else in the world that could've made him happier.
That said, on a totally different circumstance, while eating outside at Union Sq I was approached by a bum who "just wanted food." After I got up from the table and asked him to lead the way to the "pizza place" he wanted to grab something from, he realized his bluff had been called and he walked away (he was hoping that I would be lazy and just give him some money).
I guess this boils down to a bigger philosophical question, which is "am I doing the right thing, or am I getting taken advantage of?" My solution is to go the extra mile and assume the best of people. Just put the right checks in place so that you can also avoid getting taken advantage of.
As others have said, in many cases the request for food is a bluff hoping for money. There is a guy in my Brooklyn neighborhood who stands on the corner every day asking everyone, "Hey, can I get $3 to get something to eat?" We call him $3 guy. In large cities, there is not a lack of food for the homeless. (Although, to be honest, maybe it's not so easy to get to the right place at the right time, if you are strung out.)
I used to call the bluff, and have bought many sandwiches and slices of pizza (except for that guy begging in the pizza place who said he didn't like pizza [cash only, please]). At this point, I almost prefer giving out cigarettes.
This is case of "give a man a fish / teach him to fish" on a grand scale. I'm far from an expert on homelessness, but I really like things like The Doe Fund: http://www.doe.org/
Getting people out of drug/alcohol/crime/convict-status-induced homelessness is not an easy task. Helping people get their shit together, finding a purpose, and getting a job they can do is exhausting, soul-crushing work. The people who do this work are saints. Buying a guy a sandwich is no big deal.
You can't help everyone you see, or even half the people you see, and still have the time and resources to help yourself. What's important is to know what you're comfortable with doing, why you're comfortable with it: Personally, I will buy or give food, but never give money.
Sometimes, when asked for money, I will offer to walk with them to get them food instead.
Sometimes I remember that I'm pinching pennies on damn-near everything, to have just one more month's rent, just one more week of food, and have that much longer for my company to succeed. So I shrug and tell them the truth: "Sorry, right now I don't have an income either."
Sometimes "Zombie By The Cranberries By Andrew Jackson Jihad" starts playing in my head and I'm too lost in thought to prepare a response in advance. By the time we cross paths and they say something, I end up genuinely startled and its awkward for everyone.
I also don't have a point to make. Like you, this kind of thing makes me feel bad, and I just need to vent about it for a moment. At least we both can be sure our sense of sympathy is functional.
I agree. If someone asks for food, you know that they are hungry (they can't turn around and sell the food for profit). However, if they ask for money, you don't really know what their needs are.
My mother works at a seasonal food bank that provides meals in the winter and I think that's one of the best services we can provide for people that cannot provide for themselves. Food is also relatively less expensive than other aids, such as rent controlled housing.
I usually try to help out and give the less fortunate the change in my pocket when I can, but this one instance really made me reluctant to continue giving.
He was inside starbucks and was walking out the door while I was waiting for a chance to enter. He stopped me and told me his name was Marcus, he was really hungry and needed some money for food. I gave him what was in my pocket, about ~2 bucks. He took it, looked at me and said "That's it?". He scoffed and walked away.
I know, I know, one person can't represent everyone. It just stung and comes to my mind whenever I think about giving.
What does it mean for a panhandler to be a 'scammer'? They're not really homeless at all, they actually live in a mansion in Beverly Hills with a two car garage, and manage to pay for it all by asking for change on the street all day pretending to be homeless?
It's more like a guy who has been living in a $400 rent controlled 2BD apartment on Fell since 1991. He charges his roommate $800 a month, then goes and scams people on Haight for pizza money, but mainly just for kicks.
Panhandlers and the homeless are two totally different things. Of course one doesnt have to be homeless to panhandle.
By scamming, the parent poster was probably referring to stuff like "hey can I get a few bucks for a bus ticket" or "hey can I get some money for gas". That's pretty much always a scam.
I'm relatively new to San Francisco and to a newcomer, the contrast between neighborhoods is shocking. I came from New York so I was used to micro-neighborhoods but SF takes it to a different level.
It seems that SF has decided to herd all of the criminal activity and destitute people into certain neighborhoods and just contain it versus solution based approaches. I have no idea if this is the actual strategy but it sure seems like it.
I don't know what it is, but posts like this make me feel like HN is waking up and realizing the world isn't just 'social networks for dogs', and that there are real social problems out there needing to be fixed. There is a trend happening.
This post is powerful because it's recognition. The act was powerful because it was recognition, which then led to real action.
If judging by recent posts on HN, hopefully posts like this lead to more action. I want to think that this will lead to more smart thinkers here spending time to use technology do some sort of action. Even if just like the author, people think it's just one drop in the bucket unsure of any real impact, at some point we might actually begin to fill this bucket. Eventually sandwiches will turn into code. We need more of this.
San Francisco is the most expensive place in America to find a home, but that doesn’t deter the 400,000 people coming each year to the Bay Area in search of a new home and a new life.
Eleven-year-old Sera, her sister and her mother moved to San Francisco in 2009. But when the economy collapsed, her mother lost her job and the family now survives on her $600 monthly unemployment checks.
After five months in a shelter and more than a year in transitional housing, the family has moved to a one-room rent-subsidized apartment in the Tenderloin — a neighborhood synonymous with drugs and violence — while they wait for subsidized housing to come through. But they are just one missed rental payment away from returning to the shelter.
That came up on reddit too. Why are we paying insane prices to house these people in the most valuable real estate in the world, when you could help 10x as many by housing them in some place that actually affordable?
I don't understand it either. If I live in a mansion and lose my job, I don't ask for money to pay for my mansion, I move to an apartment. People who stick around here aren't helping themselves at all, but a lot of that could be why they're homeless in the first place.
Notice how many posters go from "I'm indignantly concerned about the poor in San Francisco" to "How dare you suggest there are significantly less expensive ways to provide them the same benefits" ... and which way the voting skews on that issue.
Edit: I love this part:
>After five months in a shelter and more than a year in transitional housing, the family has moved to a one-room rent-subsidized apartment in the Tenderloin — a neighborhood synonymous with drugs and violence
Gee, you don't think subsidizing long-term non-earners in the same area has anything to do with the deteriorating conditions? Nah, it couldn't be. Any time now, these buildings on the world's most valuable real estate, stocked with people who can't find entry level work, will blossom into another Marina or Nob Hill ... just a few more dollars, and we'll be there!
From a non-American perspective, the Tenderloin and SF's poverty generally is baffling. As a caveat, I realise there are contributing factors to SF poverty (homeless from other states) - this is more about the personal experience.
I haven't traveled a lot (~18 countries) but I've not encountered any poverty in a first-world city that is comparable to SF. Sure there are homeless in other cities (e.g. Rome's beggars) but not with the same confronting mix of desperation and mental health issues that I encountered in SF (I've been told NYC is worse, but I haven't been).
What exaggerated this reaction was that SF was my first US exposure. From an outside perspective we're talking about a nation with the world's largest economy since the 20's that prides itself on being a bastion of success and freedom.
The social reaction was likewise confusing. Avoiding the center of a modern city because law and order cannot be upheld was an unfamiliar concept to me, but the fact no one (police or civilian) seemed bothered that there was effectively a "no-go zone" in the middle of their city was even more surprising.
I would definitely tell someone just visiting SF (especially from a foreign country) that the TL is a "no-go". I've been there many times, but it's not the kind of place I'd want to be lost and disoriented.
Haha I definitely spent a lot of time in and around the TL. I meant more from the perspective of every local and police officer telling me "avoid the TL, don't even walk through there".
Is SF atypical in the number of mentally unstable homeless people? I moved to the US a year ago and am still blown away by the shear number of drugged up or crazy people living in the middle of the city. I've seen plenty of homeless people on my travels around the world but usually they are poor, not mentally unstable (to my knowledge).
At the Safeway where I live, there are nuns that stand outside with a grocery list of food they ask people to donate for them. I didn't know if they were really nuns so I asked the cashier, and they confirmed it, so it made it a lot easier for me to go ahead and donate food. They make food for the homeless and the donation goes straight into feeding these poor people so it's a lot better than giving food or money directly to the person, who will likely use it for drugs, etc.
I liked the sentence in original post, "Maybe it was because we had something in common: we both wanted a sandwich. Except that I was actually going to get one. I can have as many sandwiches from Subway as I want." Sometimes what I've got in common with a homeless panhandler is that we both want a beer.
I use some portion of MY money for drugs (including beer), I don't see why it should bother me if a homeless person does too. Whether or not they're going to use it on beer, I know they're a lot less comfortable than me either way, and I'm not hardly going to miss the 50 cents or $1 I contribute.
My concern isn't that they'll use it for drugs or beer, my concern is that the beer/drugs are what made them homeless in the first place. Giving them money for this stuff is potentially making their problem worse.
There's a difference when you're giving an addict drugs, it's not longer a nice gesture. Think of it like offering a drink to someone at AA - you're going to send them back into the dark hole.
I live in San Francisco too and I have to say it's OK to just buy the dude a sandwich if you feel bad or go ahead and help them up if they have fallen over instead of just walking by (I'm looking at you startup kids in south park and SOMA). And you know what, screw it, I even give them a five or a ten if I have some cash on me. It sucks being poor and it has to really suck being homeless, possibly drug addicted and maybe mentally ill and I may not be helping in the long run but you know what? They just care about the food or the a couple bucks for whatever and I care about not feeling like a tool walking by a destitute person and doing nothing for them when I know I can make their day a little better with money I'm just going to spend on overpriced coffee.
I was shocked when I came from NY to SF. The streets are incredibly dirty and some of the homeless are in really bad shape. Someone posted this link on Twitter (I saw it here on HN a bit later), and I got some insight as to why this is the case.
I tried to give a homeless person information on DSHS where they would be able to recive $200 month in food benefits (WA) plus who knows how much in TANF (welfare), and got told to fuck off to my face.
My pity for the homeless has diminished since then.
I think http://currywithoutworry.org is an excellent solution to the problem. I think it makes a huge difference in the community. People in need are able to interact, and help each other without worrying about dinner once a week.
I'm working on a project with United Way in NYC that's addressing the data issues around food banks and shelters. We could use some additional tech help.
It started after Sandy hit. All of the major charitable organizations would send resources to the areas impacted the hardest. This resulted in over servicing these areas and left about 30% of affected areas without any services at all. Also, people would be directed to food banks and shelters that were full, out of stock, closed for the day, or shut down. While other shelters and food banks remained underutilized. No one had the necessary information to direct these people to the right places.
A hackathon yielded some interesting solutions for disaster recovery - one of which was a text message system (data services were unavailable for a while - coincidentally, many homeless people have phones, but not smart phones) to coordinate volunteers and service providers. We've begun to coordinate with many of the largest service providers, non-profits, local government agencies and corporate sponsors on this.
There are so many needs of the homeless population that can be addressed by technology. We have no money to contribute, we're a struggling, over-worked, early stage startup, but we've found that even just a few hours a month makes a difference. Entrepreneurs and techs talk poorly of lawyers, but how many hours of pro-bono work do we perform each year? It's not all sexy work, but sometimes just cleaning some data one evening can impact thousands of people.
If anyone would like to volunteer for this effort, or initiate a similar effort in their community, please reach out to me: community (at) 42stats.com
I don't know if that was the right thing to do, but I did it. Maybe I'm a sucker.
I think spending time doubting yourself for performing one of the most basic acts of human kindness is way over thinking things. It only reduces the likely hood you'll do it again, and i think you'd agree the tenderloin is not suffering due to an over-abundance of kindness.
It's hard for me to be sure exactly what negative result you're worried you could have caused. I guess it's probably that by feeding him you're encouraging him to rely on others instead of resolving to seek self sufficiency. By the numbers that's vanishingly improbable - the vast majority of the seriously down and out homeless are suffering from some kind of debilitating mental illness which often gets in the way of even being able to obtain basic social services.
You don't have to help everybody or anybody and however you do help you could have always done more. You can't get wrapped up in that, you did good full stop.
I feel bad too, but I instead give my money to local food banks. I know my money is actually feeding people. Plus, the food banks' economies of scale multiply the value of my donation; the SF Food Bank claims "every $1 you donate we'll distribute $6 worth of food".
Every so often, I'll buy someone a meal: Subway, or some noodles, or something like that. Or I'll give them $5 for the BART, or whatever. Absolutely no skin off my nose; a big deal for them. And every single time, the look of joy and surprise on their faces completely cuts through any cynicism I might have had about the interaction.
I figure, every single person who's out there begging is in need. I wish there were better programs out there to help them, and I wish our community could help out. I sometimes wonder if the people selling Street Spirit could be selling a product that people actually want instead (even if it's just a magazine like the Big Issue).
I don't know the answers, but it makes me sad, too.
> I figure, every single person who's out there begging is in need.
Then you've figured incorrectly. There are absolutely a high number of these people who are scamming. A major reason they persist and misdirect resources from those that are truly need, is because of those who blindly assume "every single person" is in need.
I won't speak to specifics of my interactions with homelessness, the unfortunate interface of drugs, gangs, homeless services, and criminals in Santa Cruz is f'd up right now. Recent other events are exacerbating my feelings on that even more.
So, I will focus on a positive example of charity and goodwill. Ryan Hupfer (@hup) of iSocket has been blogging about his interactions with an individual named Mo in the city. It has been an amazing read. Hup's blog is at http://ryanhupfer.com/
I know we're being half ironic and all but I just can't let this one slip.
We're starting up nazi parties? Really? That's what you're going to go with? We also started the Pirate parties, and the fact that we're starting any sustainable party at all besides the two primary ones should be amazing to you. :D
In seattle we have a ton of missions and shelters in the downtown area. Most have a one night limit, or a weekly one night limit. But Seattle is also very walkable and there is enough shelters to round-robin and have somewhere to stay/get a meal every night of the week.
We also had a downtown "free ride" with our bus system which let you take the bus within the downtown area free of charge to promote downtown living/working. But this ended up being dominated with loitering homeless. Luckily, they finally got rid of this last summer.
Seattle also has 6 or 8 tent cities, each literally about 200 people camping in a church parking lot or city park for a 2-week span.
This part of the planet is mild enough to support human life with a minimum of shelter. Areas with this attribute will always have humans trying to survive on fewer resources than average.
I wonder how the homeless will fair when we become a cash-less society. This may be far off but it's inevitable.
While initially one might think the homeless will be worse off, I can imagine technology actually improving things. Imagine some sort of NFC chip or ID a homeless could obtain from a shelter that would allow someone to give money to them from their mobile phone...and then perhaps gamifying the goodwill (leaderboards based on city or social graph) for the donators.
This is interesting. What if all homeless people in SF were issued a cash card. The balance of the card would be controlled remotely and it could be (de)activated at any time. People who want to help the homeless could pool money together and the funds could be put onto the cards at the point of need. Perhaps retailers would be able to request the balance on behalf of the purchaser somehow - phone, web, etc. If people stopped giving cash to homeless, a system such as this could restrict the flow of money to drug dealers and liquor stores.
That was heart wrenchingly sad, thank you for doing this. I live in the Haight and I see people shivering in the cold and realize how good my life is. I am never sure whether to help people or not. I have heard contradictory stories of trustafarians and the whole philosophy that giving people money doesn't help them. Ultimately, despite all the bustle of tech, it feels like we are letting down the poorest of the poor by not helping them someway or the other.
Haight is mostly scammers and trustafarians. Well... 'trustafarian' is the wrong word. The gutter punk type kids don't really have trust funds.
When I lived there from 2006-2009, there was a very short african american guy who would pretend to be mentally retarded and everyone would give him money. However, he would totally be chillin' non-retardedly after hours at Escape from New York pizza and Milk Bar.
Most of the homeless people in the Tenderloin are legitimately down and out.
I used to walk down Market street and pass guys sleeping at 12pm in a beat up sleeping bag with a garbage bag of stuff next to them. It's hard to believe those people are 'scammers'. But what do you do? Most have metal disabilities or other problems that prevent them from contributing back to society.
A few years ago I learned a lot about trying to help homeless people with money, food, housing, and employment. Here's a blog post which details my experience of trying to help two random people from the streets of San Francisco:
To the author, Jonathan Baudanza (jbaudanza), helping others doesn't
make you a sucker, in fact, the opposite is true; helping others makes
your life rich. Thank you for buying him a sandwich.
And before the peanut gallery does it's usual thing, I've spent a few
years as a volunteer for a non-profit dedicated to assisting the victims
of fraud. I know better than most how many greedy and deceptive people
are out there trying to take advantage of others. Even with all the
deceptive malice I've seen, I still say that giving and helping makes
life rich.
I have no idea how to make a meaningful and lasting change for all of
the homeless people, and yes, this makes me sad, both their situation,
and my ineptitude. I can't help them all, but I try take solace in the
small victories. Your act of kindness is one such victory. A hungry
person got something to eat. You made a difference.
Knew a guy in my hometown who drove a BMW every day to the corner where he begged for change. At the time, he made more than I did.
On a completely separate note:
You can't help homeless people by subsidizing and enabling homelessness as a lifestyle. There is enough housing to go around, we just allocate it more efficiently than effectively.
I at one time carried around some peanut butter and jelly sandwiches which i offered to street people when asked for a handout. I got about a 50% acceptance rate and on the sandwiches. so, i think it's not all for drugs. If I missed a couple of paychecks, it could be me on the street end
For those that haven't been around long enough to remember this being posted here is an article by a guy who experimented with being homeless for a few days...
A similar "homeless experiment" is documented in Adam Shepard's book "Scratch Beginnings: Me, $25, and the Search for the American Dream." After graduating from college, he moved to Charleston, South Carolina with just $25 and a sleeping bag. He had the systemic advantages of being an educated, white male, but he created a back story about leaving a broken home and did not use any particular skills or contacts from his education.
He started in a homeless shelter and worked as a day laborer. After 10 months, he had an apartment, bought a pickup truck, and saved $5000. His story is just one anecdote, but it is an interesting one.
I find it appalling that the apriori assumption to this conversation is that all homeless people are suffering on accident. Many homeless suffer from mental illness and drug addiction. These are problems that transcend being homeless and should be looked at carefully. However, I spoke with a few homeless in the Tenderloin (where I live) and the common amswer to the question "Why do you live here?" is "It feels safe. It feels like home"
I guess I'm just asking people in this discussion to stop and talk with homeless people sometime. As many people that have gone through depression know, beinf acknowledged is one of the most important feelings when you believe you have been sequestered to a lower level.
A man outside the Central Square McDonald's in Cambridge begged me for something to eat once. I brought him out a cheeseburger on my way out and he wept with joy. Some people really are hungry.
As a regular visitor to SF, coming from Miami (whose homeless population has increased since 2008 real estate crash), what amazes me is that with such a crazy amount of wealth in the bay area and individuals with resources that no one tries to "solve" the homelessness and poverty issues in SF. You probably have more billionaires in the area than anywhere other than NYC. I know there is no easy solution, but it just strikes me as sad that such an in your face and wide spread issue is largely ignored.
Nobody knows what circumstances lead these people to the kind of lives they have now, but if unlike most of us, they were just unfortunate, then you definitely did the right thing.
I live in NYC, which doesn't lack homeless people either, and like you, I find myself saying no too many times. So sometimes, I just act on instinct and give away that Valducci's Original pizza slice or Boston Kreme Donut I have been craving all day, and it actually feels better than satisfying my hunger.
I have a friend who's a realtor who told me the story of a local homeless man in our town. "Toonie for some soup" he would ask people (I live in Canada, a Toonie is a $2.00 coin). He was always polite, and made regular appearances all around town for years.
One day this homeless guy came to visit my realtor friend. "I'd like to buy a house" he said. After years of asking for Toonies, he managed to amass $84,000.00
My friend sold him a mobile home just outside of town.
I loved going to the Tenderloin to eat good Vietnamese until I was almost-mugged a few months ago:
http://janineyoong.com/post/34007583330/invincible
It's sad, but I can't quite look at a homeless person on a quiet street anymore without the impulse to walk faster.
We get used to being asked for money and saying no, and there's always a good chance you're being conned, but at least you know you didn't let someone down. Giving out food instead of money is a much clearer-cut situation, though I've witnessed a dirty, homeless boy throw just-purchased food away - he wanted the money :/
I occasionally did the same. I would buy a couple big boxes of Cliff Bars at Costco and give away the flavors that I didn't like. I think if you're not going to help the Glide Memorial or St Anthony's or one of those, giving Cliff bars is tne next best thing (protein, B vitamins, solid sustenance)
Try going to Ocean Beach or Santa Monica, same thing there. I think helping out with food is better than with money. As a side note, I recall a National Geographics photographer that traveled the world taking pictures ended up killing himself because what he saw made him very depressed.
The homelessness has become a bad stigma to the beautiful city of San Francisco. I don't think there is any easy solution to this issue. Having lived there for 3 years, I, personally have seen strange sights around here. In this case however, I think you did the right thing.
And that is why I am happy to be out of the twitterloin. It was generally deeply disturbing. I still do not know what to do.
I desperately hope we can find something to do - there is so much money and innovation yet here, yet so many are in unbelievable shape.
As an aside, one thing I noticed recently on my walk from London Bridge Station to my office is that when it snows or is very cold, I see more beggars.
It's almost like (gasp!) they come out especially in the cold weather as they can expect more money from begging.
> If a homeless wanted to do some simple work (e.g. cleaning) in exchange for food and shelter would he be able to do so?
Probably, but why would you risk hiring them? The fact that they're homeless speaks to a lack of self-control. Even a perfectly healthy person who becomes homeless will get at least a bit messed up due to stress.
> Aren't there modern-day monks? Wouldn't people rather spend their life doing honest work with church than beg on the streets?
I've wondered this. We need secular monasteries, not just retreats for the wealthy. On the other hand, you can't really use your own motivations to understand why people are homeless. If they were thinking clearly and had a support network of friends / family that they weren't ashamed to reach out to, then they wouldn't be homeless.
I've been to a couple of these: http://www.projecthomelessconnect.com/ They take place in San Francisco and seem pretty good. Next one is on March 20th.
There used to be an old guy camping out behind a building, near where I worked. I started talking to him and offered to buy him food for which he was grateful. He never asked for money, he was happy to get a sandwich and a large bottle of water so he'd have something to take his numerous pills from the VA with. He told me, after I inquired more about him that he was a Vietnam vet among other things. I know this is a cliche, but it wasn't information he volunteered out of the blue. He was my dad's age and I believed him. The last time I saw him he shook my hand and thanked me. I remember his hands were enormous and the skin was hard like rock.
I don't have a reason for sharing this other than your post reminded me of him.
My mother taught me that the only thing one can safely gift to strangers is food, (non-alcoholic) drink or clothes. At the time I didn't dwell on the advice too much, but it makes sense to me now.
Thanks for writing this. I work right by there, walk to work from my home, and know how you feel. As jaded as it can become on a daily basis, empathy is always a good thing in my opinion.
No one in SF is hungry. In a span of a few blocks a person could eat for free 5 or 6 times a day. Money is used for drugs or McDonald's.
My advice: don't give anyone money or food. If you want to help, give your time.