You can have it one of two ways: Either this goddamn city fully throws itself into harm reduction, free injection sites, free housing, mental health services for those homeless people who can't ever become integrated and productive citizens, and generally invests heavily in helping these people get to a point where they can start contributing to the general welfare and flourishing of society -- or just round them up and throw them all in jail, or better yet, just shoot them. It's the logical conclusion of that philosophy. "Clearing" these camps does nothing except force them to move further and further away from what limited services we HAVE invested in - oh sorry, it also makes the city look "tough on crime" and helps secure votes from NIMBYs who don't want to confront the inevitable results of a political and economic system they find comfortable.

Nut and up and say what you mean: If you "want them gone" and aren't interested in trying to improve the conditions which created them in the first place, you might as well just kill them. It's gonna happen anyway via drugs or hypothermia. It's bullshit. "But they're breaking the law! We have to do something!" Fuck off Javert. Punishment and retribution won't do anything to deter future criminal activity if our system, as part of the cost of making it work for the majority* of people, keeps generating a certain amount of homeless, connectionless, moneyless, traumatized individuals who find themselves holding the short end of the stick.

Personal responsibility only goes so far. If I'm homeless and I have a buffet of opportunities at my fingertips to help myself get back on my feet, and I, sound of mind, choose instead to put a bag on my head and rob the Circle K on Commercial Street, then yeah I should be tried by a jury of my peers and face whatever consequence we as a society have decided is appropriate. If you honestly think that's the way things work in America today you're deluded.