Re:California Spent $17B on Homelessness. It’s Not Working
by giantg2 on Friday June 02, 2023 @03:11PM
(#36169458)
Similar to what I've seen in HI. I imagine there would be more in HI if it didn't cost an expensive plane ticket.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:California Spent $17B on Homelessness. It’s Not Working
by hackernewds on Friday June 02, 2023 @03:33PM
(#36169759)
There are. And they're vastly undercounted. Au contraire, the HI govt often deports the homeless off the island
Re:California Spent $17B on Homelessness. It’s Not Working
by thebigwinning on Friday June 02, 2023 @03:35PM
(#36169779)
SF and further north are hardly nice weather locations.
Re:California Spent $17B on Homelessness. It’s Not Working
by bobthepanda on Friday June 02, 2023 @03:42PM
(#36169871)
SF isn’t a tropical paradise, but temperature extremes that cause death aren’t very common.
Re:California Spent $17B on Homelessness. It’s Not Working
by ricardobayes on Friday June 02, 2023 @04:01PM
(#36170027)
Definitely, the winter I visited Mountain View it was 2C (35F) and ground frost.
Re:California Spent $17B on Homelessness. It’s Not Working
by recursive on Friday June 02, 2023 @05:28PM
(#36170977)
I think above freezing in winter might generally be considered nice weather.
Re:California Spent $17B on Homelessness. It’s Not Working
by Izikiel43 on Friday June 02, 2023 @04:06PM
(#36170077)
Define nice weather.
If we are talking winters with temperatures consistently over 0C (32F), little to no snow, seattle and portland are great for winter.
Nice weather for homeless people basically means not strong shelter required to survive, unlike the midwest and east coast which consistently freeze in winter.
Re:California Spent $17B on Homelessness. It’s Not Working
by georgeecollins on Friday June 02, 2023 @04:20PM
(#36170219)
But relative to a lot of the US-- Chicago, New York.. it is very survivable.