Homelessness Tax Would Target Rich Tech Sector in San Francisco

Discussion in '[H]ard|OCP Front Page News' started by cageymaru, Oct 15, 2018.

  1. cageymaru

    cageymaru [H]ard|News

    Messages:
    18,828
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    400 of the richest companies in San Francisco are facing a citizen led effort to raise taxes on their prosperity to pay for services for the homeless. In San Francisco, an income of $117,000 for a family of four is considered poverty. Naturally many San Franciscans do not meet this level of income and are homeless.

    A citizen led effort called Proposition C is backed by the largest employer in the region, Salesforce. Under the proposed legislature, the tax would trigger an average half-percent tax increase on companies' revenue above $50 million each year. This would raise an additional $300 million in revenue to combat homelessness. The city already allocates $380 million a year for the homelessness epidemic and even has a "poop patrol" to clean the streets.

    In San Francisco, it's also become an intriguing fight between recently elected Mayor London Breed, who is siding with the city's Chamber of Commerce in urging a no vote, and philanthropist Benioff, whose company is San Francisco's largest private employer with 8,400 workers. Breed came out hard against the measure, saying it lacked collaboration, could attract homeless people from neighboring counties to the city, and could cost middle-class jobs in retail and service. "I have to make decisions with my head, not just my heart," Breed said. "I do not believe doubling what we spend on homelessness without new accountability, when we don't even spend what we have now efficiently, is good government."
     
  2. Eshelmen

    Eshelmen 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,882
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2004
    Good.

    It's pretty damn awful right now in SF. Every day I'm there it seems someone else has moved on to the streets. And while the big SF tech companies continue to thrive, the poorer get screwed even more.

    A few years back, with this so called "epidemic", SF even tried to fine all people living on the streets, and some times immediately arrest anyone caught snoozing on the side walks. This law was eventually disregarded.

    SF needs this assistance badly. But so does many other cities/areas.
     
    Last edited: Oct 16, 2018
  3. Armenius

    Armenius [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    15,815
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    So what, exactly, are they going to do with that extra money to combat homelessness? I'm not against the safety net, but unless something is being done to lift these people out of destitution then it is going to be a never ending cycle. Maybe the government of California should step back and consider why the cost of living is one of the highest and the buying power of $1 is one of the lowest in the country right now.
     
    Nightfire, dr.stevil, Creig and 15 others like this.
  4. Hagrid

    Hagrid [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,940
    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2006
    How about the homeless get jobs?
     
    Lunas, Creig, Flexion and 11 others like this.
  5. exiled350

    exiled350 Gawd

    Messages:
    782
    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2013
    $117k/y is considered poverty in SF...

    Ea2e5290c7e3de7cd2f8618f8b10f3ec--excited-meme-love-memes.jpg
     
  6. Eshelmen

    Eshelmen 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,882
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2004

    Considering that $117k a year is considered poverty, I'd say there are plenty of people whom are educated enough to make in that ball park range and are still living in their cars...

    Not every one who lives on the streets are straight bums.
     
    Last edited: Oct 15, 2018
    F.E.A.R., phillyboy, dub77nj and 23 others like this.
  7. HeadRusch

    HeadRusch [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,062
    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2007
    Dude this isn't about generosity, it's about this equation: "When you help someone, how do you keep 10 others from showing up the next day asking for more help AS WELL as the first person who, more often than not, will simply ask...for more help".

    That's the problem. Its not turning on the tap, it's knowing when to turn it off...and then that person becomes a Nazi to half of San Fransicso.
     
    Cardio, dr.stevil, Dillirium and 28 others like this.
  8. Armenius

    Armenius [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    15,815
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    Last edited: Oct 15, 2018
  9. Eshelmen

    Eshelmen 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,882
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2004

    Instead of selectively pointing out those who help or don't help, pick on those that can easily afford a small increase in tax to help with this issue.

    It makes sense.

    Taxing the rich a bit more is bad, how?
     
    travisty, jnemesh and Vercinaigh like this.
  10. HeadRusch

    HeadRusch [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,062
    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2007
    Let's start with you, since you would then be directly affected by your moral decision. How much are you willing to forego out of your weekly pay, assuming you work, but if you don't...how many of your benefits would you give up to help a stranger.

    Or would you only select people "who make more than you".

    Now, understand....on the surface I'm with you. If Apple can spend billions making a campus, they should be able to make an annual contribution to fund the Steve JObs ReEducation Camp dorm for the underemployed, homeless, whatever...you tell me who you want to help. I agree, this makes sense.

    But I'm also looking at the slippery slope: And then when that facility is full....then what. You'd demand Apple build another one, right? Or do you say no, that's enough. Because if you say that....don't those businesses you want to add taxes to or the rich people who own them, don't they ALREADY pay
    taxes...and those taxes go to things like...homeless shelters and roads and stuff? So now you're saying "Let's add a rich person/company tax"........ok, and then watch as businesses and individuals change their tax statuses to avoid your new taxes.....an individual might not do this, but a corporation's shareholders
    will go "Um, fuck that, move this company to Ohio".
     
  11. Hagrid

    Hagrid [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,940
    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2006
    True but they could move someplace else and get a job?
     
  12. nutzo

    nutzo [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,302
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2004
    Basic economics will give you the answer.
    If you want more of something, subsidize it. If you want less of something tax it.

    So, raise taxes on rich businesses and you will have less businesses or less taxable income as companies try to avoid the tax.

    Subsidize the homeless, and you will have more homeless.
     
  13. Krenum

    Krenum [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    14,874
    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2005
    How's that sanctuary city working out for you? :LOL:
     
  14. Dalexx

    Dalexx Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    145
    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2014
    They need to go all in and tax the rich 50% Down with the rich! Bleed'em dry!
     
  15. Aireoth

    Aireoth 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,081
    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Only if your living in a basic world, reality is never so black and white.
     
    d8lock, travisty and Vercinaigh like this.
  16. 5150Joker

    5150Joker 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,868
    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    What they aren’t saying is there’s a lot of homeless who specifically travel to SF to live there. Yeah the cost of living is absurd but nobody with a decent job is homeless as they can always rent a room somewhere and then commute. Better yet if you have a degree, simply move and don’t live there, it’s not worth it at all.
     
    mord, PaulP, ReconSniper and 3 others like this.
  17. nutzo

    nutzo [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,302
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2004

    Actually it's considered low income, not poverty, and that's probably for a family of 4, so 2 people making 60$k would push the family income a above the low income threshold.

    I live in Orange County California, and a family of 4 making less than $85, qualifies as low income.

    We are only a family of 3, but based on that number we are barely above low income.
    Yet, I own a home worth high 6 figures, sent my daughter to private school, and my retirement savings are on track for a decent retirement at 65.

    How is that possible when I'm barely about low income?
     
  18. nutzo

    nutzo [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,302
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2004
    It is black and white.
    The only question is how much will this plan lower business or how many more homeless will be attracted by the free stuff.
     
  19. Zarathustra[H]

    Zarathustra[H] Official Forum Curmudgeon

    Messages:
    26,976
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2000
    The problem is it is difficult to get a job of you don't have a phone number, and address and a place to shower and clean up for an interview.




    I'd imagine the plan would be to place people in temporary cheap housing, providing mental health services and helping them with the basic skills necessary to seek and keep a job, and hopefully getting them to a place where they eventually become self sufficient.

    The part that ought to make this a little easier right now is the very low unemployment and labor shortage.

    The part that will make it more difficult is the excessive cost of living in the SF area.

    They may need to consider some sort of low cost subsidized housing initiative beyond that supported by the federal government, and reserved only for those with low incomes.
     
    d8lock, travisty and Vercinaigh like this.
  20. Brahmzy

    Brahmzy [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,959
    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2004
    Just nuke CA from orbit.
     
    scojer, ReconSniper and Burticus like this.
  21. Dahkoht

    Dahkoht Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    413
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2014
    So , maybe , don’t live in San Francisco ?
     
  22. Gigantopithecus

    Gigantopithecus [H]ardOCP Case Reviewer

    Messages:
    1,355
    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Between the 37% federal income tax rate, my state income tax, my city income tax, and the more than 10% of my income I give to charity, I'm already losing more than half of my gross income. You know why I give so much to charity on top of my relatively high tax rate? Because I can. But y'all do you. Just remember Ayn Rand died broke and on welfare.
     
  23. piscian18

    piscian18 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    11,041
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2005
    It kind of reminds me of one of those CIV type games where you have to decide if you want to build a democracy or republic authoritarian etc government. This is a pretty good example of there just not being a straight forward answer. The homeless population is not simply a single demographic with a single solution. They could be there for any number of cultural, political or economical reasons. The authoritarian in me would ship them to all the farms losing workers due to ICE and force them to work or die. The socialist would invest the money in programs towards rehabilitation, though even then would if they refuse? Do you force them into rehabilitation camps? and would it not be more economical to simply well "retire" them and dump them in a landfill? says the dictator in me.

    As an American I mostly think "This is why everyone is migrating away from cali and into denver" and wonder when Denver will become too expensive to live in due to these same issues.
     
    ReconSniper and Vercinaigh like this.
  24. Zarathustra[H]

    Zarathustra[H] Official Forum Curmudgeon

    Messages:
    26,976
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2000

    Why do people rob banks?

    Because that's where the money is.

    It's nothing against the rich, it's just that they can afford to contribute more to society that those who aren't rich and are struggling to pay rent.

    Society has certain costs associated with it, and if you don't keep up with them, you have things like crumbling bridges and massive homelessness.

    It seems ultimately more fair to ask those who have plenty to contribute slightly more, than to ask those who are already struggling, or to leave the problems unsolved.


    40% of Americans couldn't cover a $400 emergency expense. These aren't the people we should be asking to contribute more.

    1.) We have a problem that needs to be solved.
    2.) Poor and middle class people can't afford to pay more to fix it.
    3.) The problem isn't going to go away on its own.
    4.) Who else are you going to ask?
     
    LastQuestion, aphasia, d8lock and 4 others like this.
  25. Wierdo

    Wierdo [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,765
    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    They should accelerate affordable housing construction and cap rental rates, that would help allot.
     
    Sickb0y likes this.
  26. Eickst

    Eickst [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,781
    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2005
    I'm of the thought that a lot of homeless people are not homeless because they are lazy or don't make enough money or are just looking for a handout. A vast majority of them have mental issues that are not diagnosed, untreated, etc.

    This is a complicated issue, there isn't a one size fits all solution because there isn't a one size fits all reason that each individual is homeless.

    One thing that each solution takes? Money. However I agree with the previous poster, when do you turn off the tap? How do you handle people who become homeless elsewhere and just relocate their car to SF to get in on whatever handouts they have?

    If you make your city attractive to homeless people then you will get more and more of them. You have to find a way to get them back to a net positive economic value.
     
  27. Hagrid

    Hagrid [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,940
    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2006
    I remember back when I was 10 or something i would work as a shoeshine boy at my dads barber shop. If it was slow I made ammo for him in the back.(I still have the heavy ass thing, no idea what to do with it)
    If I can work at that age, I think people who are older can work.

    Now Vets are a different story.
     
    N4CR likes this.
  28. wizzi01

    wizzi01 [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,838
    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2008
    I bet you can afford a small tax increase.
     
    LightsOut41 likes this.
  29. Montu

    Montu [H]ard DCOTM x4

    Messages:
    7,785
    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Perfect for the SF crowd. Continue to subsidize a behavior you don't want and get more of it. Brilliant!!
     
    dr.stevil, mynamehere, mord and 3 others like this.
  30. SCSI-Terminator

    SCSI-Terminator Gawd

    Messages:
    1,015
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    as nutzo said: It is that black and white.

    I'm more for subsidizing the homeless for relocation to another city where they can get a job and be a productive member of society. But no god damn handouts for doing nothing. We don't need more homeless.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 16, 2018
    w4ffles, GoldenTiger, Brahmzy and 2 others like this.
  31. Zarathustra[H]

    Zarathustra[H] Official Forum Curmudgeon

    Messages:
    26,976
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2000

    Capping rental rates wouldn't help in the slightest.

    Sure, rent would get cheaper, but the result would be that there would be a massive housing shortage.

    Price ceilings and price floors never work, as they fail to consider how supply and demand work.

    The only solutions possible to control high housing prices have to include either reducing housing demand, or increasing housing supply or both.

    Price floors and price ceilings never work and just hurt people.
     
    dr.stevil, mynamehere, mord and 7 others like this.
  32. Montu

    Montu [H]ard DCOTM x4

    Messages:
    7,785
    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Shame on you for crushing the utopian dream!
     
    alxnet7227 and GoldenTiger like this.
  33. SnowBeast

    SnowBeast [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,198
    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2003
    Alcatraz Island is empty, just saying.
     
    mynamehere, OnceOver, scojer and 3 others like this.
  34. DeeFrag

    DeeFrag [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,269
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Vercinaigh likes this.
  35. cageymaru

    cageymaru [H]ard|News

    Messages:
    18,828
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    You know what I would like to see? Rich people having the option to either pay extra or join a council and cure the issue within 5 years. If they can sit down and come up with a successful plan that is tax free or cheap; then they don't have to pay the Homelessness tax. I'm going with the assumption that SOME of the well to do got there by being extremely intelligent and solving a problem that society needed a fix for. Or at least they hire employees that are extremely intelligent to run their businesses.

    If they can't figure out a working plan within 5 years, then the taxes start until one is made.

    I wonder if that would be more agreeable?

    Before someone gets angry at me, I was just brainstorming. :)
     
    d8lock, Tych-0, JoeRChillin and 2 others like this.
  36. Montu

    Montu [H]ard DCOTM x4

    Messages:
    7,785
    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    More like a brainfart.
     
    OnceOver, GoldenTiger and cageymaru like this.
  37. AtomClock

    AtomClock n00b

    Messages:
    62
    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2018
    I know lets define rich to mean anyone who makes as much money as you do! Then we can freely just take all of your money. After all, if we define you as rich then you have too much and we can take it and just give it to someone else. And, if you don't want to give up all of your money then we will show up with guns and take it from you!
     
  38. Donald Bell

    Donald Bell Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    163
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Is this thread really devolving into arguing whether it is worth helping the homeless with a 0.5% tax on extremely profitable businesses in Silicon Valley?

    Anyone ever play the arm wrestling exercise in grade school? The teacher offers an M&M to the student each time they win, attempting to win as many times as in 1-minute. Yeah, the stronger student will get more M&Ms than the weaker student. But, if the stronger student is willing to work with the weaker student, they both get a bunch of M&Ms by knocking their arms back and forth. Until students "got it", winners were averaging like 4 M&Ms. Pairs of students who "got it", averaged 20-25 M&Ms each. Hopefully that grade school lesson helps someone "get it".
     
    Eshelmen and Vercinaigh like this.
  39. HeadRusch

    HeadRusch [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,062
    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2007
    Awesome. What happens when the teachers run out of M&M's? Right. Venezuela happens.
     
  40. Youn

    Youn [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,196
    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2007
    tax-rate-history-us-chart.png

    and imagine another line below the blue one for people like trump
     
    Wierdo, d8lock, travisty and 2 others like this.