I don’t disagree, but in my view there are really two issues here. Yes, homelessness, drug dealing and their attendant problems are symptoms of broader systemic issues. But they are also quality-of-life issues that result in the denial of public space to law-abiding citizens and adverse economic effects to surrounding neighborhoods. One municipality cannot single-handedly solve the opioid crisis, but it might be able to crack down on an open-air drug market through punitive measures that provide a deterrent effect.
If (if) that works, so what? Yes, the problem will just go elsewhere and that’s a shame, but ultimately a municipality is responsible for protecting the quality of life of its residents. IMO, at least - you’re certainly entitled to disagree and many folks where I live do so. (Sorry if I’m projecting too much - still boggles the Chronicle’s report on a village in Honduras with McMansions built with Tenderloin drug money paying homage to their cash cow.)