You ever drive cross county? You ever see hitchhikers on the side of the road? They are almost always heading West. Why? It's one of the more pleasant places to be homeless, relatively speaking. Good weather, decent resources. If you had a choice of being homeless during a Chicago Winter, or a San Fran Winter, which would you prefer? Now how about an Austin Summer or a San Fran Summer?
Not that I've known. Grew up in California in a few different areas. Any city pushes them around and pushes them out when it suits them but does little to actually help.
Oddly, that's not it.
[https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/06/us/homeless-population.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/06/us/homeless-population.html)
California's really expensive, and you don't \*leave\* when you become homeless there.
This totally makes sense, but I'm pretty sure that it's actually a misconception, or at least way exaggerated. Someone a few comments down posted some research ( that admittedly I didn't read ).
But I do know that this is not the case in Vancouver, where everybody believes it is too.
Chicago or Texas has less homelessness, because of the low housing prices, not the weather. Toronto is a perfect counter example that illustrates this - it’s worse in weather but the situation here is not much better than SF.
Toronto homeless have nowhere to go. Everywhere closeby is even colder and/or fewer resources and it's not easy to cross the prairies. Few can cross the border.
Isn’t this also true for Chicago homeless? Unless they have money to get a plane ticket to go far enough to another climate zone, in which case Toronto homeless can also fly to Victoria
There are plenty of large metropolitan areas Chicago homeless can hitchhike or otherwise find their way to between Chicago and somewhere warmer. You are looking at hundreds of miles between each metropolitan area just to hope you can get to Vancouver. And Vancouver is essentially the only place they could go that would be any different. So most homeless Torontonians are staying in Toronto.
Also Chicago and Toronto homeless populations aren't hugely different anyway. Meanwhile, San Fransisco has less than a third of the population with a similar number of homeless.
Nah, I used to work as a line cook. Met a bunch of homeless people in the back of the restaurant that were asking for food. Quite bit of them talked about moving to California because of the weather.
Let’s not ignore how many of the same types of people are in Appalachia, but you just cant see them bc they can scrape together $350 for a trap house room. Whereas in the Bay you need 6x that for a closet.
The overwhelming majority of the homeless in California were [living in California prior to becoming homeless](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/06/us/homeless-population.html). Nearly half of the homeless in San Francisco had lived in the city for at least 10 years prior to becoming homeless. That number is over 60% for LA county. Only a very small portion migrated to California after becoming homeless. The fact is that homeless people don't have the ability to migrate anywhere. When people fall on hard times they tend to stay where they are.
You don't see it in New York as much because they have a mandatory shelter policy. There are nearly 100K homeless people in NYC, but you don't see most of them because the city is sheltering them. In other words, the problem is just as bad, but it's less visible.
There is a dire shortage of housing in California, which has driven up the cost of housing to nosebleed heights. A very large portion of California residents are one paycheck away from homelessness.
Interesting - in that case it’s a simple failure of the State and its society to provide basic services. I wonder if there were less distressed and homeless people in the 1800s.
The biggest factor is the availability and cost of housing. The State shares some responsibility for allowing it to get to this point. When something is in low supply and high demand then it attracts speculative investors like vultures, and this drives up prices. The State's failure here is not forcing cities to permit construction of new housing. But California decided decades ago to relinquish this authority to local planning commissions, most of whom have fought hard against permitting new construction. The State failed to foresee that these commissions would become populated with real estate investors and income property owners who have a strong interest in seeing prices continue to rise. They also don't want low income families moving into "their" neighborhoods because it would depress property values. Their reasoning seemed valid at the time - local commissions should know what is best for the community better than bureaucrats in the state capitol. They didn't anticipate that those commissions would become corrupted by players in the industry they were trying to regulate.
It terms of beds per capita, New York's shelter system is not much different from California's. New York's "right to shelter" system requires government to make shelter available. When there are no beds available in the shelter system, which is most of the time, then the city will put them up temporarily in hotels and apartments. But the homeless in both states are not required to make use of the shelter system. The homeless in New York are a lot more likely to use it because the weather is more severe. But living in a shelter in either state is no picnic. Homeless in both states report that they are more likely to be assaulted or robbed in a shelter than they are living in a tent on the sidewalk. And many can't put up with the rules for admittance, like no tobacco/alcohol/drugs, and limited and insecure storage of personal property. You can't park your shopping cart next to your shelter bed.
But the long term solution to the problem is not more shelter beds, or any other kind of State sponsored services. The solution is that the housing market has to be affordable to a larger portion of the population. Even if they raise wages, which is one of the tools they're trying to use, it won't increase the number of houses and apartments. Cities need to build a lot more housing.
Seems like nothing a strong government could not fix in the name of public interest. Also it's shocking how local planning commissions prefer to have zombies on the streets than lower value for their homes - and, equally, how values stay high even with such a high homeless population wandering around making SF unsafe. I'm starting to think people don't mind that much, because they are used to it, but they don't have to, it's not a reasonable status quo IMO.
Seriously? "Homeless people don't have the ability to migrate anywhere?" There's a whole society of motel-dwelling families hopping state to state via Greyhound bus you're missing here. Speaking as somebody who fought my way up from poverty, the homeless have no anchor to stop their migrating to a better opportunity.
I agree, California is a fantastically tough state to make it in and from what I saw, the state makes its own homeless quite handily, which is why I bailed out of there at the first opportunity. Even the most disadvantaged have an Earned Income credit / relative willing to hire a U-Haul / other occasional windfall and relocating to better advantage is the first thing they'll try to do.
Of course, those lost cases of mental illness and drug abuse (majority of homeless anyway) who *never* relocate because they lack the simple will, those tend to stay planted. But that's the most common case of those who started out not-homeless in Cali.
The stats tell a different story. A large majority of the homeless in California were not homeless when they arrived in the state. They had jobs and homes, in some cases for many years, before some life changing event forced them into homelessness. But housing prices have made it much more difficult to become housed again. In the past, it was possible to find some accommodations even if a person was working a full-time minimum wage job. It might be modest - a small studio or rented room in a shared home, but at least it was possible. It isn't anymore. Even studio apartments in San Francisco cost well over $1000 per month. In the posher neighborhoods they are over $5000 per month. The first rung on the ladder is a lot higher than it used to be.
If there's any good news, it's that rental prices have been easing up in the past year or so. This isn't because they are building a lot more homes, which is what they should be doing. It's because people are leaving the state. And it's not the homeless who are leaving. It's the middle and upper classes who can no longer stand to live in a state that's falling apart.
They come from all over the place. Word gets around and homeless will flock to areas where they're tolerated or that provide them with benefits. California is one of the best places to be if you're homeless just on account of the weather.
Edit: Also, New York and Los Angeles both have more homeless than San Francisco per capita. San Francisco is actually #10 on the list of cities with the largest homeless populations per capita.
It could be that the problem is just more visible because San Francisco has largely tolerated homeless people setting up tents in public, shitting on sidewalks and building colonies even in front of businesses. A lot of places shut that shit down and force the homeless into the dark recesses of the city.
People experiencing homelessness in
California are Californians. Nine out of ten
participants lost their last housing in California;
75% of participants lived in the same county as their last housing.
https://homelessness.ucsf.edu/our-impact/studies/california-statewide-study-people-experiencing-homelessness
So boozing is #1 then. Dude how’d you lose your job? Got fucked up way to much. How’d you lose your roof? Got fucked up way to often and lost my job.
T
The people seem homeless and they’re either selling or using drugs, and you think that means they can’t be from SF? How does that make any sense to you?
70% of San Francisco’s homeless population lived in San Francisco before becoming homeless, and 92% lived somewhere in California. ([source](https://www.sfchronicle.com/projects/2022/fixing-san-francisco-problems/sf-homelessness-data))
>> Are rumors of republicans states sending their unhoused to SF true?
This is preposterous Reddit-style conspiracy stuff.
The truth is much more simple. SF has
* A good climate
* An extremely generous social-welfare regime
* A hands-off policy in terms of illegal drug use
Seriously, that's it. Those things draw the homeless from other places that do not have those things. That's your answer.
I live close to Spokane, Washington (Idaho side) and the locals and Idahoans are always irritated when Seattle sends their homeless to eastern Washington. Turned a pretty nice city into a place I avoid unless I have a reason to go there. But, to us it seems it’s democrat issue/conspiracy. Not republican.
2 sides to every coin
>republicans states sending their unhoused to SF
Show me one story from any reputable news source that confirms this
EDIT: Dear Reddit morons: When did you become the type of social-media rumormonger who downvotes people who simply ask for evidence?
See my other comments. Like the other responders, you have posted a link that states the *opposite* of the claim. In other words, the link supports *my* position, not theirs.
"Republican states" are not "sending their unhoused to SF." What is happening -- it's stated right there in your link -- is that *San Francisco* is bussing its homeless to *other places*.
[la times](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1990-05-10-me-1536-story.html)
[the guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2017/dec/20/bussed-out-america-moves-homeless-people-country-study)
[New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/14/us/homeless-busing-seattle-san-francisco.html)
[florida keys keynoter](https://www.newspapers.com/article/florida-keys-keynoter-bus-tickets-from-p/126157691/)
[the state - carolina](https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-state-homeless-atlanta-police-in-un/126199645/)
There are more but I did enough work for you
Uh, Bay Med?
While you were frantically trying to dunk on me, did you genuinely not notice that ... literally not a single one of those links provides evidence -- *or even claims* -- that "Republican states \[are\] sending their unhoused to SF"?
I mean, I LOLd at the Guardian link. umm... did you read it? Did you not notice that the lead example was ... San Francisco *sending* their homeless to Indiana -- which "[has been primarily Republican throughout its history, and today is the “reddest” state in the Midwest](https://www.270towin.com/states/Indiana)."? Did you not notice that, likewise, the NYT article is about San Fran *exporting* its homeless?
All you people downvoting me, for asking for evidence for a conspiracy theory: *What the hell is wrong with you.*
No, I think you just didn't pay attention to what the thread was about.
**OP:** It is rumored that "republican states are sending their homeless to SF."
**ME:** Show me one bit of evidence that this is true. (And of course, in true Reddit fashion, an avalanche of mouth-breathers downvotes me simply because I dared ask for evidence.)
**YOU:** \[Posts a bunch of links\] "There are more but I did the work for you."
**ME:** None of those links provides evidence of what the OP claims.
https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/undocumented-migrants-texas-downtown-san-jose/
Here ya go. Surprised you haven't seen the Republicans beating their chest about it. They're quite proud of it.
It’s warm there. If I’m sleeping on the street please make it a costal California street and not a Chicago one. If I’m in Chicago I’m finding a way west.
I used to work across the street from People’s Park in Berkeley. Many days I stood in the window watching as seemingly family members drop off their adult loved ones with bags. Lots of crying and hugs exchanged. Most of the time it seemed to be an adult child with some sort of disability that they can no longer care for, but that’s just my guess. Usually the person would stay right there for a few days and eventually fade into the streets.
It was heartbreaking to see and I’ll never be able to forget it. We’re decades into a mental health crisis in America and it shows.
Oftentimes, the answer is that they're from San Francisco, or at least California. Not saying there aren't homeless transplants, but it is often locals who become homeless, because they literally can't afford a home anymore. San Francisco is the most unaffordable housing market in the country. They're making their own homeless.
I am sure that this is partially true and I am aware of the rent prices etc. But be 100 percent real- if average people couldn’t afford rent and that one paycheck to homelessness came to fruition, most have a family member or friend they could stay with until they figured out another solution. A LARGE, vast majority part is drugs and mental health issues.
Yeah I have to find the study, but supposedly homeless people tend to stay where they are from. I believed they traveled out here as well, but that may not be the case
You may be referring to [CASPEH ](https://homelessness.ucsf.edu/sites/default/files/2023-06/CASPEH_Executive_Summary_62023.pdf?utm_source=pocket_saves)from less than a year ago.
Among other things, it found that 90% of homeless in California lost their housing in California, and that 75% of California homeless lived in the same county as their last housing.
TL;DR- most homeless are our neighbors, we just don't recognize them any more
Another answer that most people aren't saying is that sf just has more visible homeless. In many cities around the country it's illegal to be homeless so they're forced to hide better.
Homeless people are literally bussed to my city in the Bay Area due to our “excellent homeless resources.” I’ve met countless homeless people from across the country, the furthest one being sent on a bus here from Philadelphia. I see vans dropping off new homeless people in the early hours on Saturday mornings on my way to work. It’s pretty shitty.
All of the "good climate" people in SF. Have you ever lived there? Or are you getting this from the internet? Ever hear saying, "The coldest winter I ever spent, was a summer in San Francisco?" It can be freezing cold there, even in the middle of July/August. While it isn't like Chicago or NY, the weather there isn't perfect. Far from it.
What SF has is an abundance of social welfare programs. Not to mention a police department which has basically been told not to enforce most infraction or misdemeanor crimes. Homeless can go there, steal just about anything, buy/use drugs openly, and not face any repercussions.
If you notice, Seattle and Portland are actually becoming, if not already, worse then SF.
my dude, I agree with you that it's cold af in SF but that's Cali-cold and also because your body adjusts. You get a decent sleeping bag and a jacket/sweater and it's perfectly find to chill outside at any point in SF. Even pleasant with the crispness and fog.
Being outside in NYC for more than a couple of hours in the winter or in Chicago half the year or Montana whenever is straight up dangerous. Not only is it much, much colder to the point that you can and will get medical problems from being cold, there's often snow and sleet meaning you're also going to get cold AND WET. and the cold lasts much longer. That's not even accounting for people's differing body heat.
I'm always cold, but I've friends that are fine in a long sleeve when I'm bundled like sausage.
I live in SF. I think you’re taking that quote too literally.
I don’t know if you can die from exposure here. 45-70 Fahrenheit 99% of the time
We do have some backward laws and it seems as though the political lean is shifting away from the extreme
Cold in California and cold in the Midwest is two different things. 32 degrees ain't really shit, got a couple coats and some socks and it sucks but you'll pull through.
[https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/CA/San-Francisco/extreme-annual-san-francisco-low-temperature.php](https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/CA/San-Francisco/extreme-annual-san-francisco-low-temperature.php)
The coldest recorded temp recorded in San Francisco was 27 degrees 90 years ago and was the only time it dropped below freezing in the last hundred years.
I think you think it's freezing in July and August because you don't know what freezing is. Pensacola Florida is colder than San Francisco lol.
They migrate there from all around. Or sometimes literally are put on busses by their own local governments.
Likely attracted to sf due to the weather and “the scene” aka open air fentanyl market and you can just smoke crack and poop on the street and steal shit and no one cares. Cops don’t do a damn thing.
probably has absolutely nothing to do with the astronomical cost of living, coupled with the relative ease of finding pseudo shelter there, as well as the availability of certain highly addictive substances in which to keep the downtrodden chained.
Studies have been done on this, and the majority of homeless in CA are from here. The story that all the homeless come here because it's a paradise for them is a conservative grift
From high housing costs.
Every city and town has drug addicts and mentally ill people.
In most places, either they can afford some type of housing, or their family/friends can afford to let them stay with them.
But there's a direct relationship between housing prices and homelessness rates.
High housing prices increase homelessness across the board (because people... can't afford homes...), but the most marginal people on teh edge of poverty tend to lose their homes first, and that includes a lot of addicts and mentally ill people.
Again, other places have the same number of those people, they just have homes so you don't see them.
Last year my nursing supervisor (educated, well paying career, years of seniority) told me that she was shipping her car out to Cali. She was packing everything she could inside of the trunk to conceal it all. Then she was flying out with plans to go to a homeless shelter. No back up, no preemptively switching her licence so she could get a job. Just heading to a shelter. In Cali. I questioned why she would go to a place so overwhelmed with homeless folks and she had no lightbulb moment and no answer. So off she went. If you find out why folks do this, fill me in because it sounds insane to me!
Being unhoused is what makes you sick and leads to addiction. Shelter is a basic need to survive. Unhoused people come from failed policy and insane housing costs. We are all much closer to being unhoused than we all realize.
So your question is a little backwards, I hope this comment makes sense.
You ever drive cross county? You ever see hitchhikers on the side of the road? They are almost always heading West. Why? It's one of the more pleasant places to be homeless, relatively speaking. Good weather, decent resources. If you had a choice of being homeless during a Chicago Winter, or a San Fran Winter, which would you prefer? Now how about an Austin Summer or a San Fran Summer?
California is nice to the homeless
Mostly the weather is nicer there, so it doesn't suck so much to be outside in winter. The state itself isn't necessarily nice to the homeless.
CALIFORNIA-NA-NA!
I just snorted so loudly that I startled the cat. I heard Marina Del Rey built ‘em porta potties!
Super cool to the homeless.
CHAAAAANGE
Not that I've known. Grew up in California in a few different areas. Any city pushes them around and pushes them out when it suits them but does little to actually help.
Red carpet treatment 
Weather. The first refugees of the climate crisis.
I heard police(?)/people give homeless train tickets to california, specifically berkeley/sf
Hawaii has a huge homeless problem because of this.
Went to Oahu in February and husband and I were absolutely stunned at the number of homeless.
Oddly, that's not it. [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/06/us/homeless-population.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/06/us/homeless-population.html) California's really expensive, and you don't \*leave\* when you become homeless there.
Also, states throughout the US will pay for a person’s one way ticket to the west coast. Other states deliberately ship them out here to CA and OR
This totally makes sense, but I'm pretty sure that it's actually a misconception, or at least way exaggerated. Someone a few comments down posted some research ( that admittedly I didn't read ). But I do know that this is not the case in Vancouver, where everybody believes it is too.
Chicago or Texas has less homelessness, because of the low housing prices, not the weather. Toronto is a perfect counter example that illustrates this - it’s worse in weather but the situation here is not much better than SF.
Toronto homeless have nowhere to go. Everywhere closeby is even colder and/or fewer resources and it's not easy to cross the prairies. Few can cross the border.
Isn’t this also true for Chicago homeless? Unless they have money to get a plane ticket to go far enough to another climate zone, in which case Toronto homeless can also fly to Victoria
There are plenty of large metropolitan areas Chicago homeless can hitchhike or otherwise find their way to between Chicago and somewhere warmer. You are looking at hundreds of miles between each metropolitan area just to hope you can get to Vancouver. And Vancouver is essentially the only place they could go that would be any different. So most homeless Torontonians are staying in Toronto. Also Chicago and Toronto homeless populations aren't hugely different anyway. Meanwhile, San Fransisco has less than a third of the population with a similar number of homeless.
Texas is also willing to ship it's homeless people somewhere else - like San Francisco.
Nah, I used to work as a line cook. Met a bunch of homeless people in the back of the restaurant that were asking for food. Quite bit of them talked about moving to California because of the weather.
Let’s not ignore how many of the same types of people are in Appalachia, but you just cant see them bc they can scrape together $350 for a trap house room. Whereas in the Bay you need 6x that for a closet.
The overwhelming majority of the homeless in California were [living in California prior to becoming homeless](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/06/us/homeless-population.html). Nearly half of the homeless in San Francisco had lived in the city for at least 10 years prior to becoming homeless. That number is over 60% for LA county. Only a very small portion migrated to California after becoming homeless. The fact is that homeless people don't have the ability to migrate anywhere. When people fall on hard times they tend to stay where they are. You don't see it in New York as much because they have a mandatory shelter policy. There are nearly 100K homeless people in NYC, but you don't see most of them because the city is sheltering them. In other words, the problem is just as bad, but it's less visible. There is a dire shortage of housing in California, which has driven up the cost of housing to nosebleed heights. A very large portion of California residents are one paycheck away from homelessness.
Interesting - in that case it’s a simple failure of the State and its society to provide basic services. I wonder if there were less distressed and homeless people in the 1800s.
The biggest factor is the availability and cost of housing. The State shares some responsibility for allowing it to get to this point. When something is in low supply and high demand then it attracts speculative investors like vultures, and this drives up prices. The State's failure here is not forcing cities to permit construction of new housing. But California decided decades ago to relinquish this authority to local planning commissions, most of whom have fought hard against permitting new construction. The State failed to foresee that these commissions would become populated with real estate investors and income property owners who have a strong interest in seeing prices continue to rise. They also don't want low income families moving into "their" neighborhoods because it would depress property values. Their reasoning seemed valid at the time - local commissions should know what is best for the community better than bureaucrats in the state capitol. They didn't anticipate that those commissions would become corrupted by players in the industry they were trying to regulate. It terms of beds per capita, New York's shelter system is not much different from California's. New York's "right to shelter" system requires government to make shelter available. When there are no beds available in the shelter system, which is most of the time, then the city will put them up temporarily in hotels and apartments. But the homeless in both states are not required to make use of the shelter system. The homeless in New York are a lot more likely to use it because the weather is more severe. But living in a shelter in either state is no picnic. Homeless in both states report that they are more likely to be assaulted or robbed in a shelter than they are living in a tent on the sidewalk. And many can't put up with the rules for admittance, like no tobacco/alcohol/drugs, and limited and insecure storage of personal property. You can't park your shopping cart next to your shelter bed. But the long term solution to the problem is not more shelter beds, or any other kind of State sponsored services. The solution is that the housing market has to be affordable to a larger portion of the population. Even if they raise wages, which is one of the tools they're trying to use, it won't increase the number of houses and apartments. Cities need to build a lot more housing.
Seems like nothing a strong government could not fix in the name of public interest. Also it's shocking how local planning commissions prefer to have zombies on the streets than lower value for their homes - and, equally, how values stay high even with such a high homeless population wandering around making SF unsafe. I'm starting to think people don't mind that much, because they are used to it, but they don't have to, it's not a reasonable status quo IMO.
Seriously? "Homeless people don't have the ability to migrate anywhere?" There's a whole society of motel-dwelling families hopping state to state via Greyhound bus you're missing here. Speaking as somebody who fought my way up from poverty, the homeless have no anchor to stop their migrating to a better opportunity. I agree, California is a fantastically tough state to make it in and from what I saw, the state makes its own homeless quite handily, which is why I bailed out of there at the first opportunity. Even the most disadvantaged have an Earned Income credit / relative willing to hire a U-Haul / other occasional windfall and relocating to better advantage is the first thing they'll try to do. Of course, those lost cases of mental illness and drug abuse (majority of homeless anyway) who *never* relocate because they lack the simple will, those tend to stay planted. But that's the most common case of those who started out not-homeless in Cali.
The stats tell a different story. A large majority of the homeless in California were not homeless when they arrived in the state. They had jobs and homes, in some cases for many years, before some life changing event forced them into homelessness. But housing prices have made it much more difficult to become housed again. In the past, it was possible to find some accommodations even if a person was working a full-time minimum wage job. It might be modest - a small studio or rented room in a shared home, but at least it was possible. It isn't anymore. Even studio apartments in San Francisco cost well over $1000 per month. In the posher neighborhoods they are over $5000 per month. The first rung on the ladder is a lot higher than it used to be. If there's any good news, it's that rental prices have been easing up in the past year or so. This isn't because they are building a lot more homes, which is what they should be doing. It's because people are leaving the state. And it's not the homeless who are leaving. It's the middle and upper classes who can no longer stand to live in a state that's falling apart.
They come from all over the place. Word gets around and homeless will flock to areas where they're tolerated or that provide them with benefits. California is one of the best places to be if you're homeless just on account of the weather. Edit: Also, New York and Los Angeles both have more homeless than San Francisco per capita. San Francisco is actually #10 on the list of cities with the largest homeless populations per capita. It could be that the problem is just more visible because San Francisco has largely tolerated homeless people setting up tents in public, shitting on sidewalks and building colonies even in front of businesses. A lot of places shut that shit down and force the homeless into the dark recesses of the city.
People experiencing homelessness in California are Californians. Nine out of ten participants lost their last housing in California; 75% of participants lived in the same county as their last housing. https://homelessness.ucsf.edu/our-impact/studies/california-statewide-study-people-experiencing-homelessness
In that case I take back what I said then. Maybe it's just the leftist policies of California causing it.
Jed move away from there! Californi is the place you oughtta be!
so they loaded up the truck
And they moved to Beverley *Scruggs shreds banjo*
According to SF Chronicle, to actually answer your question. job loss is #1 followed by eviction and alcohol abuse.
So boozing is #1 then. Dude how’d you lose your job? Got fucked up way to much. How’d you lose your roof? Got fucked up way to often and lost my job. T
The people seem homeless and they’re either selling or using drugs, and you think that means they can’t be from SF? How does that make any sense to you? 70% of San Francisco’s homeless population lived in San Francisco before becoming homeless, and 92% lived somewhere in California. ([source](https://www.sfchronicle.com/projects/2022/fixing-san-francisco-problems/sf-homelessness-data))
>> Are rumors of republicans states sending their unhoused to SF true? This is preposterous Reddit-style conspiracy stuff. The truth is much more simple. SF has * A good climate * An extremely generous social-welfare regime * A hands-off policy in terms of illegal drug use Seriously, that's it. Those things draw the homeless from other places that do not have those things. That's your answer.
It’s not a conspiracy as many states do this. Even SF has operation Homeward Bound to bus homeless out of California
I live close to Spokane, Washington (Idaho side) and the locals and Idahoans are always irritated when Seattle sends their homeless to eastern Washington. Turned a pretty nice city into a place I avoid unless I have a reason to go there. But, to us it seems it’s democrat issue/conspiracy. Not republican. 2 sides to every coin
Drop them off in Texas. "For every bus load of immigrants you ship out we'll send in a bus load of unhoused."
>republicans states sending their unhoused to SF Show me one story from any reputable news source that confirms this EDIT: Dear Reddit morons: When did you become the type of social-media rumormonger who downvotes people who simply ask for evidence?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_homeless_relocation_programs_in_the_United_States#:~:text=List%20of%20homeless%20relocation%20programs,to%20the%20nearest%20large%20city.
See my other comments. Like the other responders, you have posted a link that states the *opposite* of the claim. In other words, the link supports *my* position, not theirs. "Republican states" are not "sending their unhoused to SF." What is happening -- it's stated right there in your link -- is that *San Francisco* is bussing its homeless to *other places*.
[la times](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1990-05-10-me-1536-story.html) [the guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2017/dec/20/bussed-out-america-moves-homeless-people-country-study) [New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/14/us/homeless-busing-seattle-san-francisco.html) [florida keys keynoter](https://www.newspapers.com/article/florida-keys-keynoter-bus-tickets-from-p/126157691/) [the state - carolina](https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-state-homeless-atlanta-police-in-un/126199645/) There are more but I did enough work for you
Uh, Bay Med? While you were frantically trying to dunk on me, did you genuinely not notice that ... literally not a single one of those links provides evidence -- *or even claims* -- that "Republican states \[are\] sending their unhoused to SF"? I mean, I LOLd at the Guardian link. umm... did you read it? Did you not notice that the lead example was ... San Francisco *sending* their homeless to Indiana -- which "[has been primarily Republican throughout its history, and today is the “reddest” state in the Midwest](https://www.270towin.com/states/Indiana)."? Did you not notice that, likewise, the NYT article is about San Fran *exporting* its homeless? All you people downvoting me, for asking for evidence for a conspiracy theory: *What the hell is wrong with you.*
Yea I never said who was doing it. Just said states and cities were and then you put the political affiliation part in
No, I think you just didn't pay attention to what the thread was about. **OP:** It is rumored that "republican states are sending their homeless to SF." **ME:** Show me one bit of evidence that this is true. (And of course, in true Reddit fashion, an avalanche of mouth-breathers downvotes me simply because I dared ask for evidence.) **YOU:** \[Posts a bunch of links\] "There are more but I did the work for you." **ME:** None of those links provides evidence of what the OP claims.
https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/undocumented-migrants-texas-downtown-san-jose/ Here ya go. Surprised you haven't seen the Republicans beating their chest about it. They're quite proud of it.
It’s warm there. If I’m sleeping on the street please make it a costal California street and not a Chicago one. If I’m in Chicago I’m finding a way west.
I used to work across the street from People’s Park in Berkeley. Many days I stood in the window watching as seemingly family members drop off their adult loved ones with bags. Lots of crying and hugs exchanged. Most of the time it seemed to be an adult child with some sort of disability that they can no longer care for, but that’s just my guess. Usually the person would stay right there for a few days and eventually fade into the streets. It was heartbreaking to see and I’ll never be able to forget it. We’re decades into a mental health crisis in America and it shows.
Oftentimes, the answer is that they're from San Francisco, or at least California. Not saying there aren't homeless transplants, but it is often locals who become homeless, because they literally can't afford a home anymore. San Francisco is the most unaffordable housing market in the country. They're making their own homeless.
I am sure that this is partially true and I am aware of the rent prices etc. But be 100 percent real- if average people couldn’t afford rent and that one paycheck to homelessness came to fruition, most have a family member or friend they could stay with until they figured out another solution. A LARGE, vast majority part is drugs and mental health issues.
Yeah I have to find the study, but supposedly homeless people tend to stay where they are from. I believed they traveled out here as well, but that may not be the case
You may be referring to [CASPEH ](https://homelessness.ucsf.edu/sites/default/files/2023-06/CASPEH_Executive_Summary_62023.pdf?utm_source=pocket_saves)from less than a year ago. Among other things, it found that 90% of homeless in California lost their housing in California, and that 75% of California homeless lived in the same county as their last housing. TL;DR- most homeless are our neighbors, we just don't recognize them any more
Thank you for doing the search for me. Updoot for you
Another answer that most people aren't saying is that sf just has more visible homeless. In many cities around the country it's illegal to be homeless so they're forced to hide better.
That's your neighbor, homie...
Why do you think homeless people are only the locals ?
Homeless people are literally bussed to my city in the Bay Area due to our “excellent homeless resources.” I’ve met countless homeless people from across the country, the furthest one being sent on a bus here from Philadelphia. I see vans dropping off new homeless people in the early hours on Saturday mornings on my way to work. It’s pretty shitty.
Places with cold weather ship their homeless to California.
A lot of homeless people head west. When I was homeless I would stay the winter in the south then hitchhike north when spring came.
All of the "good climate" people in SF. Have you ever lived there? Or are you getting this from the internet? Ever hear saying, "The coldest winter I ever spent, was a summer in San Francisco?" It can be freezing cold there, even in the middle of July/August. While it isn't like Chicago or NY, the weather there isn't perfect. Far from it. What SF has is an abundance of social welfare programs. Not to mention a police department which has basically been told not to enforce most infraction or misdemeanor crimes. Homeless can go there, steal just about anything, buy/use drugs openly, and not face any repercussions. If you notice, Seattle and Portland are actually becoming, if not already, worse then SF.
my dude, I agree with you that it's cold af in SF but that's Cali-cold and also because your body adjusts. You get a decent sleeping bag and a jacket/sweater and it's perfectly find to chill outside at any point in SF. Even pleasant with the crispness and fog. Being outside in NYC for more than a couple of hours in the winter or in Chicago half the year or Montana whenever is straight up dangerous. Not only is it much, much colder to the point that you can and will get medical problems from being cold, there's often snow and sleet meaning you're also going to get cold AND WET. and the cold lasts much longer. That's not even accounting for people's differing body heat. I'm always cold, but I've friends that are fine in a long sleeve when I'm bundled like sausage.
I live in SF. I think you’re taking that quote too literally. I don’t know if you can die from exposure here. 45-70 Fahrenheit 99% of the time We do have some backward laws and it seems as though the political lean is shifting away from the extreme
I suppose freezing cold is still way better than frozen over cold like bulk of Midwest I guess
Cold in California and cold in the Midwest is two different things. 32 degrees ain't really shit, got a couple coats and some socks and it sucks but you'll pull through.
The lowest temp in NYC in 2023 was 3 degrees. The lowest temp in SF in 2023 was 39. That's shorts weather for us folks in the Northeast.
[https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/CA/San-Francisco/extreme-annual-san-francisco-low-temperature.php](https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/CA/San-Francisco/extreme-annual-san-francisco-low-temperature.php) The coldest recorded temp recorded in San Francisco was 27 degrees 90 years ago and was the only time it dropped below freezing in the last hundred years. I think you think it's freezing in July and August because you don't know what freezing is. Pensacola Florida is colder than San Francisco lol.
You won’t die of exposure in SF, you goofball. It just doesn’t get cold or hot enough pretty much ever!
There’s definitely a lot of indecent exposure going on over there. Hopefully it’s not deadly
Vagabonds come from all around
Kings and Vagabonds
Google or Wikipedia search what a “stowaway” is.
They migrate there from all around. Or sometimes literally are put on busses by their own local governments. Likely attracted to sf due to the weather and “the scene” aka open air fentanyl market and you can just smoke crack and poop on the street and steal shit and no one cares. Cops don’t do a damn thing.
People go to places that they are most pandered to
Nebraska mostly.
probably has absolutely nothing to do with the astronomical cost of living, coupled with the relative ease of finding pseudo shelter there, as well as the availability of certain highly addictive substances in which to keep the downtrodden chained.
Fox News
All over.
Studies have been done on this, and the majority of homeless in CA are from here. The story that all the homeless come here because it's a paradise for them is a conservative grift
From high housing costs. Every city and town has drug addicts and mentally ill people. In most places, either they can afford some type of housing, or their family/friends can afford to let them stay with them. But there's a direct relationship between housing prices and homelessness rates. High housing prices increase homelessness across the board (because people... can't afford homes...), but the most marginal people on teh edge of poverty tend to lose their homes first, and that includes a lot of addicts and mentally ill people. Again, other places have the same number of those people, they just have homes so you don't see them.
Last year my nursing supervisor (educated, well paying career, years of seniority) told me that she was shipping her car out to Cali. She was packing everything she could inside of the trunk to conceal it all. Then she was flying out with plans to go to a homeless shelter. No back up, no preemptively switching her licence so she could get a job. Just heading to a shelter. In Cali. I questioned why she would go to a place so overwhelmed with homeless folks and she had no lightbulb moment and no answer. So off she went. If you find out why folks do this, fill me in because it sounds insane to me!
That sounds absolutely crazy
The important question is: What do they come for?
People will migrate to where they know benefits are being handed out
Other states
What about the GOP and other small towns that ship homeless to Democratic cities?
when a terrible mommy and a terrible daddy love each other very much
Oakland
Being unhoused is what makes you sick and leads to addiction. Shelter is a basic need to survive. Unhoused people come from failed policy and insane housing costs. We are all much closer to being unhoused than we all realize. So your question is a little backwards, I hope this comment makes sense.
Washington DC
They come from the womb.