FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Homeless Industries in San Francisco

by BINOY KAMPMARK

It is a condition that the United States has given a particular meaning to.  From being the light on the hill for liberty, the American vision has become a case of survival on the streets.  Homeownership, even renting, is a privilege.  Welfare is set for the chop.  Food stamp recipients have been branded creatures of indulgent ill-fare.  The homeless are being rounded upon.

Even such havens of well-tempered affluence such as San Francisco are marked not merely by the sizeable population of homelessness (6,436 by one count) but the increasing numbers who are joining their ranks.  Rent prices are on the rise.  Eviction notices in San Francisco have hit a 12-year high.

What stands out in the problem of homelessness is that its solutions have themselves become part of the industrial complex that many of its activists decry. Governments and the non-profit system are bound by a system that has become the context of its own existence.  San Francisco demonstrates this to a tee.

Bevan Dufty of the city’s department of Housing, Opportunity, Partnership and Engagement has been less than enthusiastic about whether the shelter system will be expanded.  This is despite his admission that shelter beds have been lost.  With a bureaucrat’s awareness, Dufty’s response has been one of management speak: one has to “have a toolbox to respond in different ways.”

In response to the recent removal of a homeless encampment under the Interstate 280 highway, Dufty claimed that “we’re trying something new, and its about getting the people on the right path.”

Jennifer Friedenbach of the Coalition on Homelessness has observed that the shelter waitlist system is “archaic” as it is.  “People spend 17 hours a day trying to get a bed at night.”  Suggestions have been made as to how to open up the system.  Homelessness Czar Dufty has not been responsive.

The city budget in San Francisco, awaiting approval by the Board of Supervisors, does include funding for families and individuals facing homelessness.  Last Thursday, some $2.4 million was slated as “add-backs” to services for the homeless, along with the $2.3 million pledged by Major Ed Lee to stem the increasing number of families and individuals facing homelessness (SF Bay Guardian, Jul 2).  This is far from enough, though the problem as ever is not necessarily how much is put into the programs but how it is spent.

The critics of the system also see homelessness as an opportunity for the morally insipid, or at the very least, the disingenuous.  Ethnographic work such as Teresa Gowan’s Hobos, Hustlers, and Backsliders:hoboshomeless Homeless in San Francisco (2010) shows how the entire approach to the homeless in San Francisco can be centred around such themes as “authoritarian medicalisation” and gradual criminalisation of various practices.  The Matrix program, to take one sterling example, fined people for panhandling, public urination, sleeping in doorways and blocking sidewalks.

Tactics have been implemented to keep the “sightless” presence of the homeless away from wealthier residents. The Silicon Valley complex is as much a curse, creating deep pockets at one end while emptying those at the other.  What can’t be seen can’t hurt you.

Recent attention has also been drawn to the increased number of gay homeless individuals in San Francisco.  As Ian Burrell writing for The Independent (Jul 1) observed, “It’s built a reputation as the most gay-friendly on earth. But the mask is slipping.”  The Human Services Agency of San Francisco (SF-HSA) recently revealed that 29 percent of the city’s homeless population stem from the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community.  Even being in a shelter is no consolation from being free from violence.

Where there is a problem, there is bound to be an industry rather than a solution.  It is inherent in any such response that no solutions shall ever be found.  One needs the other.  As with any industry, some are well meaning, others indifferent, and many ruthlessly ambitious.  Social working clans have proliferated. Programs are not solutions.

As Gowan has explained, each institution has its own taxonomy, its own range of terms to identify the problematic homeless specimen.  “Doctors diagnose them as depressive, social workers treat them as chaotic addicts, and police officers treat them as impediments to the quality of life of other San Franciscans.”

Seemingly everything has been proposed, from creating “wet houses” to pay the homeless to take care of rescue dogs, to Homeless soccer, a curious panacea that emphasises healthy living.  The geniuses of the homeless industry will have to do better than that, but the incentives to cure it are vanishing.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne.  Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

 

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

February 20, 2017
Bruce E. Levine
Humiliation Porn: Trump’s Gift to His Faithful…and Now the Blowback
Melvin Goodman
“Wag the Dog,” Revisited
Robert Hunziker
Fukushima: a Lurking Global Catastrophe?
David Smith-Ferri
Resistance and Resolve in Russia: Memorial HRC
Kenneth Surin
Global India?
Norman Pollack
Fascistization Crashing Down: Driving the Cleaver into Social Welfare
Patrick Cockburn
Trump v. the Media: a Fight to the Death
Susan Babbitt
Shooting Arrows at Heaven: Why is There Debate About Battle Imagery in Health?
Matt Peppe
New York Times Openly Promotes Formal Apartheid Regime By Israel
David Swanson
Understanding Robert E. Lee Supporters
Michael Brenner
The Narcissism of Donald Trump
Martin Billheimer
Capital of Pain
Thomas Knapp
Florida’s Shenanigans Make a Great Case for (Re-)Separation of Ballot and State
Jordan Flaherty
Best Films of 2016: Black Excellence Versus White Mediocrity
Weekend Edition
February 17, 2017
Friday - Sunday
David Price
Rogue Elephant Rising: The CIA as Kingslayer
Matthew Stevenson
Is Trump the Worst President Ever?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Flynn?
John Wight
Brexit and Trump: Why Right is Not the New Left
Diana Johnstone
France: Another Ghastly Presidential Election Campaign; the Deep State Rises to the Surface
Neve Gordon
Trump’s One-State Option
Roger Harris
Emperor Trump Has No Clothes: Time to Organize!
Joan Roelofs
What Else is Wrong with Globalization
Andrew Levine
Why Trump’s Muslim Travel Ban?
Mike Whitney
Blood in the Water: the Trump Revolution Ends in a Whimper
Vijay Prashad
Trump, Turmoil and Resistance
Ron Jacobs
U.S. Imperial War Personified
David Swanson
Can the Climate Survive Adherence to War and Partisanship?
Andre Vltchek
Governor of Jakarta: Get Re-elected or Die!
Patrick Cockburn
The Coming Destruction of Mosul
Norman Pollack
Self-Devouring Reaction: Governmental Impasse
Steve Horn
What Do a Louisiana Pipeline Explosion and Dakota Access Pipeline Have in Common? Phillips 66
Brian Saady
Why Corporations are Too Big to Jail in the Drug War
Graham Peebles
Ethiopia: Peaceful Protest to Armed Uprising
Luke Meyer
The Case of Tony: Inside a Lifer Hearing
Binoy Kampmark
Adolf, The Donald and History
Robert Koehler
The Great American Awakening
Murray Dobbin
Canadians at Odds With Their Government on Israel
Fariborz Saremi
A Whole New World?
Joyce Nelson
Japan’s Abe, Trump & Illegal Leaks
Christopher Brauchli
Trump 1, Tillerson 0
Yves Engler
Is This Hate Speech?
Dan Bacher
Trump Administration Exempts Three CA Oil Fields From Water Protection Rule at Jerry Brown’s Request
Richard Klin
Solid Gold
Melissa Garriga
Anti-Abortion and Anti-Fascist Movements: More in Common Than Meets the Eye
Thomas Knapp
The Absurd Consequences of a “Right to Privacy”
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail