> No other western city that I have visited has the massive, in-your-face homelessness as SF.
SF is unique not in the size of the homeless population, but in its distribution.
The linked study refers to metropolitan areas (thus including Oakland as part of the SF Bay), but SF ranks 12th in the nation behind Tampa, Seattle & San Jose among others [1]
In both DC [21] and to a lesser extent Seattle [8], for instance, you could quite conceivably live, work and play in areas without visible signs of homelessness (including the commute in between).
In SF, of course, this is impossible. Certain parts of Market street (bordering on the Tenderloin) are about as run down as a major downtown area gets in the developed world.
I can't speak for most other cities on the list. But in DC you can from far out wealthy suburbs (e.g. Loudoun County to the White Houss and see homeless. It certaintly is not as prevelant as I've seen in Tenderloin/SF but its not hidden either.
There are plenty of homeless in Washington, and downtown some are fairly aggressive in their panhandling. I'm not aware of them in the suburbs, as mentioned by jeffd703, but then I don't get out Loudoun County much.
There are plenty of homeless in DC, but the vast majority are well out of sight in major business and residential districts. It's in part a "virtue" of the intense economic (and racial) segregation in the district.
I was born and raised in DC and have lived there for the last 6 years, working and living downtown. Of course there are homeless people (as opposed to the bizarrely antiseptic Palo Alto, for instance), but the level of visible homelessness is not in the same zip code (let alone ballpark) as SF. Honestly, it's not even close.
SF is unique not in the size of the homeless population, but in its distribution.
The linked study refers to metropolitan areas (thus including Oakland as part of the SF Bay), but SF ranks 12th in the nation behind Tampa, Seattle & San Jose among others [1]
In both DC [21] and to a lesser extent Seattle [8], for instance, you could quite conceivably live, work and play in areas without visible signs of homelessness (including the commute in between).
In SF, of course, this is impossible. Certain parts of Market street (bordering on the Tenderloin) are about as run down as a major downtown area gets in the developed world.
[1] http://b.3cdn.net/naeh/a18b62e5f015e9a9b8_pdm6iy33d.pdf