Daly's just "keepin' it real"
Alan writes:
"I nearly got my ass kicked for taking this picture today outside of my place on Leavenworth. This is the view that a $1100 apartment gets you in district six. I see this guy out here almost every day. Sad and all but he choses to get drunk and sleep on the sidewalk. He has a home or at least I see him go into a building a couple blocks away but for some reason he sleeps it off on the street. I thought about putting a Daly campaign sign on him as an advertizement for his relection but the two guys leaning against the wall 10' away didn't like me taking pics around them. Wonder why. Hey Chris, you're a failure!"
"I nearly got my ass kicked for taking this picture today outside of my place on Leavenworth. This is the view that a $1100 apartment gets you in district six. I see this guy out here almost every day. Sad and all but he choses to get drunk and sleep on the sidewalk. He has a home or at least I see him go into a building a couple blocks away but for some reason he sleeps it off on the street. I thought about putting a Daly campaign sign on him as an advertizement for his relection but the two guys leaning against the wall 10' away didn't like me taking pics around them. Wonder why. Hey Chris, you're a failure!"
posted by the clicker at 8:54 PM
5 Comments:
I don't suppose you considered asking if he was all right or offering him a cup of coffee?
Since apparently you're not in San Francisco, I can understand why you might assume that he was in need of help, or coffee. But if you've spent any time in San Francisco, you'd know that the majority of people you see lying on the sidewalk are neither ill nor in need of caffeine; they're passed out from alcohol and/or drugs. Anyone who doubts this need only walk down Haight St. or anywhere in the Tenderloin to see dozens of people passed out just like this fellow.
It's a simple and sad fact that D-6 is the dumping ground for San Franciscans in drug and alcohol rehab programs, as well as for parolees and sex offenders. How many such people are living in rental units in Pacific Heights? How many passed-out alcoholics or addicts will you see on the sidewalk there? Zero.
The reasons for this are mostly because people in Pacific Heights have more financial clout with which to pressure the Police and DA's office to prosecute quality-of-life crimes, and because they have a Supervisor (Michela Alioto-Pier) who understands that her constituents have a right to live without people treating their neighborhood as a toilet, campground and drugstore.
The person who sent me the picture and post said that they see him going into a residence, so apparently he isn't homeless. And San Francisco spends literally hundreds of millions of dollars every year on aid for such people, and has countless agencies and advocacy groups devoted to helping them, so he has access to whatever he needs. That he still decides to pass out on the sidewalk is entirely his own choice. Nobody is forcing him to be there.
"Not in San Francisco"? Who do you think you're kidding?
I have lived in District Six for ten years and have been familiar with Civic Center and the Tenderloin since 1989. I also know enough about poverty work to find it ridiculous when you talk about anyone "voluntarily" choosing to pass out on the sidewalk, and sadly wretchedly wrong when you claim that an impoverished drunk "has access to whatever he needs." You should try being poor in this city some time before you make a "let them eat cake" comment like that.
You have not understood that the police department is responsible for concentrating poor people and parolees downtown. Police harass poor people and people with criminal records in other neighborhoods and push them into zones of tolerance that the police informally choose, such as the Tenderloin.
Apparently you just want to throw everybody poor or irregular out of the whole town, not just out of the zones of tolerance.
In whatever suburb you come from, banishment may work. It doesn't work here, because people have to stop moving some time. You have to promote greater tolerance for difference in the surrounding area, and you have to provide decent services in the current zones of tolerance. Providing such services begins with treating poor and troubled people like human beings.
Martha, you don't know me, so I can't blame you for trotting out the standard bleeding-heart lines about the poor homeless and substance-abusing people in D6.
Well, I've lived in SF for 21 years, and almost 10 of those in the same apartment in the upper Tenderloin, so I think that my observations and opinions here are at least as valid as yours. And, despite what you might think, I'm no conservative. I was a hardcore, straight-edge punk back in the first -half of the '80s, I've been a member of the Green Party since 1986, and I'm a long-time vegan, animal rights activist and direct environmental activist. I also donate my time and money to various nonprofits that work with the needy in SF. And I didn't come from the suburbs, as you claim; I grew up on a small farm in the San Joaquin Valley.
You claim that I don't understand the plight of the homeless and poor; you presume that I have no relevent experience. Well, in fact, I WAS homeless at one time, and I have always been poor, although self-sufficient.
In 1985, I was in an accident and, due to that, I lost my job and my living situation and ended up on the street. During that time, with my leg in a cast, I slept in the Salvation Army shelter, I ate in soup kitchens, and I searched for work--finally getting a job as a dishwasher from 4pm to 2am. Never did I ask any person or government for any help, and never would I have accepted it. Within 3 months, I had saved enough for a room, and I've never looked back.
I happen to BE one of those "poor" you mention. I earn less than $20,000 a year, running my own business. I could actually "earn" more money if I were living in the East Bay, on SSI, AFDC and GA, and panhandling. In fact, SF spends more money per year on homeless services for each homeless person than I earn working full-time!
You claim that there aren't agencies to help people with substance abuse problems, such as this "wretched drunk". Rubbish! There's a list of literally hundreds of local agencies -- both governmental and private -- that offer help to them, from Walden House to Delancey St. to S.T.E.P. to M.A.P./CATS. San Francisco is more generous than any other city in the US when it comes to offering help to substance abusers and homeless people.
You also claim that "people have to stop moving sometime". The time for them to stop moving was before they came to San Francisco. The majority of the homeless, mentally ill and substance abusers in San Francisco are NOT native San Franciscans; they moved here within the past 7 years. The fact is that San Francisco, with its tolerant residents, generous tourists, mild weather, lax law enforcement and drug laws and its generous agencies -- is a magnet city for people from all over the US. Knowing full well that our housing and job markets are the toughest in the country, people move here who don't have jobs or homes lined up. Who provides their safety net? Everyone else. How long are we expected to provide that net? Indefinitely. In short: if a person wants to get a job and their own home, San Francisco is the very WORST place to move to. If a person wants to live without a job or earning their own rent, San Francisco is the very BEST place to move to.
That's why "Care, not Cash" has such overwhelming support among San Franciscans: it's the first substantive help for those homeless who want to move back into society, that's been tried for years. So far, it's moved about 800 chronically homeless people off the streets and into homes, and has built over 1,300 new housing units just for such people. Of course Chris Daly opposed it all the way. Given that there are more homeless people living in D6 than anywhere else, I find that doubly ironic.
wow, Mr. Tender-nob - you ROCK!!!!
Post a Comment
<< Home