I think wtbob means either a) liberal & progressive government is inefficient and therefore things are bad, or b) homeless people move to SF because liberal & progressive government makes it better to be homeless there than in other places in the US. I am not sure which.
I really dislike the second argument (which I've read before). Effectively they're arguing for shifting the problem rather than actually solving it, we've literally seen states put mentally ill people on buses out of state(!).
Utah has a lot of problems (and is really conservative in most other ways), but you have to give them props for actually trying to solve the homeless issue[0] rather than hiding it or sending it out of town. Although the same state turned down Medicaid expansion funding which would have helped those with mental illness, so it isn't all rainbows and sunshine.
I'm sure it doesn't compare to SF, but the "homeless issue" is hardly solved in SLC, Utah, from my anecdotal experiences living here. If the homeless population has been reduced "91%" as this article maintains, then I cannot imagine what it was like before.
