It would be easy to dismiss your post as merely repugnant, and it certainly is. Essentially you're proposing a death march from one city location to another.
But the lack of logic you display is common when people discuss the homeless problem.
So I'll illustrate a productive way to discuss this.
Let's assume the following demographics about SF, which has a reported budget of over $300 million for 5,000 homeless (and rapidly growing as rents skyrocket) - that's $60,000/yr per homeless person:
- 50% of homeless are healthy but unemployed - we can fix this fairly easily. Provide a mailing address, missing id documents, cubicles for job interview calls, and databases of room rentals and employers. Have a help line to sort out kafkaeque procedural problems, like e-verify database problems.
This would be incredibly cost-effective for solving the current problem, but equally important for the coming tidal wave of even more homeless as rents continue to rise in 2020.
Some housing assistance would be needed, say 90 days, as well as acute medical assistance, but hey, $300 million - where's it being spent today?
- 50% of homeless are mentally ill - there is no short-term solution for those in psychosis, but we have data now on the effects of closing long-term care facilities and can revisit those policies. The milder cases can be helped to stabilize and integrate with society, but the rest need institutional care.
Decreasing from 5,000 people on the streets to 2,500 in SF is a huge win and would really improve the situation for everybody and allow resources to focus on the more difficulat cases.
Without an actionable plan, the alternative is Mad Max, which Market St. has already become.