The article suggests the number was already growing at an alarming rate even before covid. While this is tragic, I'm not sure we can attribute these deaths solely to covid lockdowns.
It also behooves us to consider the practicality of public health measures. It's extremely easy for a californian mayor to tell people to stay home/wear masks and get a relatively high level of compliance. Getting people to stop using drugs is a much taller order.
And do WHAT, for them? What concrete thing are you supposed to DO?
No matter what YOU think is a solution, most of the homeless will refuse consent. Now what?
You can't just force a person into mental health or drug treatment without their consent unless they commit a crime or are an immediate danger to themselves.
Needle exchanges help. Methadone clinics help. And for the people who don't comply?
Most of the "homeless solutions" are effectively "move them somewhere else--preferably jail". That's really what people who want SF to "get control" of the homeless problem actually want.
Edit: Okay all you genius downvoters, let's hear your "solutions" for the SF homeless problem. I'm waiting with bated breath for your glorious insights ...
I have a theory that homelessness is an industry that employs tons of people who are unable to find work elsewhere. The homeless are the product.
Non profit org, public sector employees, donations, city employees, univ PhD researchers, grants etc...for every dollar, more than 60%(I will have to look up the exact number)..will go towards managing the homeless rather than aiding the homeless find a roof over their heads.
This might seem like a cynical way to view this but there is no reason why SF is spending in excess of 500 million dollars in ONE YEAR and still have homeless on the street.
There is literally zero incentive to solve homelessness. Now imagine the problem is resolved..how many people will be out of work? These are not drug addicts or mentally ill..they are educated and normal functioning people who need jobs..they need to be employed. Without a job, they will be unemployed and likely unhoused due to economic necessity.
Of course, people can migrate out of bay area. That would be the rational thing to do. Millions of immigrants do this every single day. But Americans won’t travel coast to coast in the worlds most boring homogeneous country where any freeway or Walmart or mcD in CA is no diff than in NH if economic survival and upward mobility is the imperative.
That’s my 2c anyways.
If you really care about public safety, you should pay attention to homelessness, drug addiction, and the problems in the streets! It's killing people 4x as fast as Covid, and yet nobody cares! This is exactly the problem that GP was talking about, and you come back with a smug "well our Covid rates are really low" comment.
You're ignoring the point by looking only at Covid. Look at the rest of the data. A city is more than its covid rate.
[1] https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/heatherknight/article/Tw...
> Older Black men living alone in residential hotels are dying at rates far higher than their portion of the city population. And yet most of us will see these statistics, think they’re a shame, and quickly move on.
> Even as [we] devote tremendous time and attention to quashing COVID-19, another public health epidemic that has killed far fewer San Franciscans. As of Saturday, that tally was 123.
> We’re a city that freaks out about a jogger running past without a mask, but doesn’t blink at someone injecting themselves in the neck on a Tenderloin sidewalk.