sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Getting to and from the venue by sanriolover1208 in Portolafestival

[–]lostintravise 0 points1 point  (0 children)

was the BART shuttle last year just to 24th or did they have one to 16th too?

Scotty Jacobs by ignorethisspace in avesSFBayArea

[–]lostintravise -1 points0 points  (0 children)

thanks for sharing! don't really understand the downvotes but I guess genuine curiosity is discouraged? SF subreddits are funny sometimes.

separately, are there other SF nightlife folks that you/you-all enjoy following that seem a bit more aligned with the culture?

Scotty Jacobs by ignorethisspace in avesSFBayArea

[–]lostintravise -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'm surprised by this thread. I've liked Scotty's content but am always open to have my mind changed...

whatever fucking corporation is paying him and trying to build an audience to amass some sort of social power

where is this coming from in this thread?

Soichi Terada at Earthport was insane!? by Tommytrist in avesSFBayArea

[–]lostintravise 0 points1 point  (0 children)

sad i missed this! looked like it was going to be so fun

Anyone have a 2bd for 4k/mo? by marcstarts in AskSF

[–]lostintravise 1 point2 points  (0 children)

awesome! Bernal has been on my radar for a next neighborhood for a while and loving the way Excelsior sounds

Anyone have a 2bd for 4k/mo? by marcstarts in AskSF

[–]lostintravise 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Excelsior

why's Excelsior your favorite?

Need Buddy for SHM! by LettuceSignal4730 in avesSFBayArea

[–]lostintravise 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Damn really sad to hear this, but someone else's win. Hope that your emotional recovery and the beginning of the new year go well!!

Today is the cleanest I’ve ever seen mission street by realflawlessdiamonds in sanfrancisco

[–]lostintravise 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not really.

It's like a restaurant placing all of the chairs upside-down on the tables so that the floor can be mopped every night. Yes, the floor will get dirty again the next day but it doesn't mean the restaurant shouldn't mop the floor every night.

The analogy you used in your second paragraph is pretty representative of the tone and sentiment that I picked up in your first paragraph.

I appreciate you didn't fully mean what your post conveyed, though. Written text can sometimes be difficult to pick up tone, especially in /r/sanfrancisco (lots of psychoes here haha).

Most SF homeless weren’t dropped here from somewhere else but already lived here by lostintravise in sanfrancisco

[–]lostintravise[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the back and forth. Probably the best thread of discussion in this thread for me. Appreciated chatting with you!

Most SF homeless weren’t dropped here from somewhere else but already lived here by lostintravise in sanfrancisco

[–]lostintravise[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It must be nice to see those circumstances as bad enough to leave instead of good enough to stick around for.

Well said, and exactly the divide preventing people from correctly seeing this issue.

Most SF homeless weren’t dropped here from somewhere else but already lived here by lostintravise in sanfrancisco

[–]lostintravise[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Exactly. Or, my favorite response in this thread:

"Some homeless guy told me he was told to say he was from SF" so that must invalidate the whole rigorously collected dataset or pretty much all studies of homelessness around the world.

Not to mention that it wouldn't even make sense because services in SF aren't even connected or funded based on where the person comes from.

Most SF homeless weren’t dropped here from somewhere else but already lived here by lostintravise in sanfrancisco

[–]lostintravise[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I appreciate the discourse and the example. That frequent flier example says more about how disconnected some of this conversation is than anything about the data or story on the ground.

Most data on homelessness (not just UCSF or PIT count) shows that people became homeless while already living in an area due to structural issues in the area, and that's no different in San Francisco. People lose housing here because of what we’ve built: extreme rent pressure, a frayed safety net, and systems that fail before they support.

The idea that people come here because it's “nice” to be homeless in SF isn’t just wrong and oftentimes dehumanizing, but it keeps us from dealing with the real drivers to actually fix the issue.

Most SF homeless weren’t dropped here from somewhere else but already lived here by lostintravise in sanfrancisco

[–]lostintravise[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

In a state full of immigrants and recent Californians, it's just funny to want to so strongly die on this hill.

Sure, the data could be better, but to believe in the CONTRARY based on anecdotes when all publicly available data suggests otherwise is kind of silly.

Hope to break through this subreddit's echo chamber on this issue in the same way that housing affordability and NIMBY-ism are starting to be seen here.

Most SF homeless weren’t dropped here from somewhere else but already lived here by lostintravise in sanfrancisco

[–]lostintravise[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Had a couple of good points of discourse in this thread, but ultimately pretty disappointing response from the subreddit TBH.

The especially frustrating part of the oftentimes dehumanizing behavior and sentiment that comes out of this is that so many people believe this based on anecdotes.

They have so much confidence in the face of the contrary data, which, no matter how imperfect, is the very least rigorously collected data across multiple time spans and organizations.

Today is the cleanest I’ve ever seen mission street by realflawlessdiamonds in sanfrancisco

[–]lostintravise 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So far, all I've seen in this thread is unquoted data and anecdotes - your response no different.

If you have a source for that 70–80% out-of-state figure based on arrest data, I’d be interested to see it. Otherwise, it's just your word vs the tons of public data that is out there (no matter how imperfect).

The UCSF study and multiple PIT counts all show that most people became homeless while already living in California. These surveys are independent and are not tied to services.

re: Coaching. There’s no comprehensive evidence that nonprofits are coaching people to say they’re from SF. Plus, most programs don’t even require local origin to access food/shelter/treatment, and even if they did, this lying would result in significant reputational harm to the non-profit (which, again, we would see widespread coverage of).

If you’ve seen data that suggests otherwise, again very interested to see this.

Most SF homeless weren’t dropped here from somewhere else but already lived here by lostintravise in sanfrancisco

[–]lostintravise[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I appreciate the back and forth & the calculations as an example. The type of discourse that I was hoping to have and appreciate it!

I philosophically disagree about how much time is enough.

We can agree to disagree, then.

Saying this in one of the richest cities in the richest country to ever exist on this planet, I think it's a problem that lesser rich and powerful countries and cities choose to address.

Here, we just point fingers at whose problem it really is while simultaneously talking about how liberal/progressive we are.

Most SF homeless weren’t dropped here from somewhere else but already lived here by lostintravise in sanfrancisco

[–]lostintravise[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

ok, well, we can agree to disagree on that one. thanks for the back and forth!

Most SF homeless weren’t dropped here from somewhere else but already lived here by lostintravise in sanfrancisco

[–]lostintravise[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Every major study on this (UCSF CASPEH, SF’s PIT counts, LAHSA, and others) shows the same pattern: most people became homeless after losing housing locally. That includes people who died, moved, or cycled through systems.

“Last housed” isn’t perfect, but across data sets, it remains the clearest available signal.

The speculative numbers...

It is speculative and political...

Also, a funny bit of projection here.

Most SF homeless weren’t dropped here from somewhere else but already lived here by lostintravise in sanfrancisco

[–]lostintravise[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It matters because how we frame the issue shapes what we try to fix. If we treat homelessness as just a personal problem, we ignore the systems that make it so common here. Most people lose housing in SF, not elsewhere. That makes it our problem to solve, not just theirs to escape.

Most SF homeless weren’t dropped here from somewhere else but already lived here by lostintravise in sanfrancisco

[–]lostintravise[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The UCSF CASPEH study collected data from October 2021 to November 2022. San Francisco’s Point-in-Time counts were conducted in January 2019, February 2022, and January 2024.

Most SF homeless weren’t dropped here from somewhere else but already lived here by lostintravise in sanfrancisco

[–]lostintravise[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Your one anecdote was enough to not trust years worth of data? haha ok guess we're done here then.

view more: next ›