San Francisco Mayor London Breed's successor, Daniel Lurie, has finally shown some much-needed sanity by shutting down the city's $5 million "Managed Alcohol Program," which gave booze to homeless drinkers. The misguided initiative aimed to keep them from going into withdrawal by getting them drunk in the first place.
The plan was flawed from the start, as it essentially gave homeless people more of what kept them on the streets in the first place – alcohol. It's not exactly a recipe for success when you're pouring money down the drain to enable addiction instead of helping people get sober.
The program only served 55 individuals at an average bar tab of nearly half a million dollars each, leaving many wondering how much taxpayer cash was being squandered on this dubious initiative. Lurie's decision is a welcome respite from the city's trend of overindulging its addiction problem with poorly thought-out programs.
The debate around providing services to homeless addicts remains contentious, with some arguing that needle exchange programs can protect against disease but also enable addiction. San Francisco has taken this approach too far under Lurie's predecessor, London Breed, who allowed open-air "safe use" areas where users could get high with city supervision.
There's a point of balance to be reached here – the city shouldn't be enabling addiction, and taxpayers shouldn't be footing the bill. Lurie's decision to axe MAP marks a step in the right direction, signaling that common sense has finally prevailed.
While there's still much work to be done for San Francisco's budget woes and other pressing issues, Lurie's willingness to take a moderate stance on federal government disagreements has yielded better outcomes so far. His decision on MAP demonstrates a crucial quality: the ability to show simple, sound judgment in policy-making – something sorely lacking from local leaders of late.
The plan was flawed from the start, as it essentially gave homeless people more of what kept them on the streets in the first place – alcohol. It's not exactly a recipe for success when you're pouring money down the drain to enable addiction instead of helping people get sober.
The program only served 55 individuals at an average bar tab of nearly half a million dollars each, leaving many wondering how much taxpayer cash was being squandered on this dubious initiative. Lurie's decision is a welcome respite from the city's trend of overindulging its addiction problem with poorly thought-out programs.
The debate around providing services to homeless addicts remains contentious, with some arguing that needle exchange programs can protect against disease but also enable addiction. San Francisco has taken this approach too far under Lurie's predecessor, London Breed, who allowed open-air "safe use" areas where users could get high with city supervision.
There's a point of balance to be reached here – the city shouldn't be enabling addiction, and taxpayers shouldn't be footing the bill. Lurie's decision to axe MAP marks a step in the right direction, signaling that common sense has finally prevailed.
While there's still much work to be done for San Francisco's budget woes and other pressing issues, Lurie's willingness to take a moderate stance on federal government disagreements has yielded better outcomes so far. His decision on MAP demonstrates a crucial quality: the ability to show simple, sound judgment in policy-making – something sorely lacking from local leaders of late.
. I mean, come on, pouring $500k into getting drunk is just not gonna cut it when you're trying to help people overcome addiction 
. It's all about finding balance, right? You gotta give 'em the tools they need to get sober without enabling their addiction in the first place 
. I'm all for needle exchange programs and stuff like that, but this "Managed Alcohol Program" was just a recipe for disaster 
. San Francisco needs leaders who can think critically and make smart decisions, not just follow the crowd or try to be a social justice warrior 
. Lurie's decision is a big step in the right direction 
.
. I mean, what's next? Giving everyone free booze and calling it a day? It's like they thought that would magically get people off the streets. Newsflash: booze doesn't solve homelessness 
. 500k per person? Are you kidding me?! That's just throwing good money after bad 
. We need more leaders like him who can think with their heads, not just follow the crowd 
. It just seems so obvious now that giving booze to homeless people wasn't gonna help them get off the streets. I mean, come on, it's like pouring gas on a fire 
! But at least Daniel Lurie is making some sense of it all - it's about time someone showed some common sense in city hall 
.
. Lurie's decision 2 axe MAP is a major win, but we need more ppl in city gov makin sensible decisions. I mean, needle exchange programs r one ting, but we cant just enable addiction 2o all 
. Glad 2 c some sanity returnin 2 city hall 
I mean, can you believe that some people thought giving booze to homeless folks would help them? Like, what's next? Handing out free smartphones and Netflix subscriptions too? It just goes to show how misguided these programs are. And the fact that it cost half a million dollars each is just mind-boggling! Interesting that Lurie finally saw sense and shut it down. Maybe San Francisco can learn from its mistakes and find better ways to help those in need 
! It's just plain silly to think giving booze to homeless people would help them. I mean, come on, it's like throwing money at a problem without even trying to solve it 
. At least he's taking a step back and looking for better ways to help these folks. It's all about finding that balance between helping people and not enabling addiction 
. I'm all for supporting needle exchange programs and other services that can actually make a difference, but this MAP thing was just a waste of taxpayer cash 
. Kudos to Lurie for finally showing some common sense in policy-making 
. I mean, pouring millions into booze for homeless people isn't exactly a winning formula 
. But at the same time... I don't know, maybe they were trying to help people get sober or something? And what if needle exchange programs do prevent disease but also enable addiction? 
. And if he can keep showing sound judgment in policy-making, that's a plus 
.
.
. Either way, it's good to see some common sense being applied here and I hope the city can start tackling their budget woes and other pressing issues in a more responsible way 
.