Homelessness Tax Would Target Rich Tech Sector in San Francisco

[lcpiper]

only Native Americans belong in America, return to whatever dump you came from.

And don't forget the delusional, they need help too

 

[tempertantrum]

Obviously you don't know history or geography. Native Americans came from Asia across what is now known as Alaska into Canada and down to North America. So again, you comment has no merit.

You do realize that:

1.) the immigration laws have always been incredibly racist, with quotas favoring "white" Europeans.
2.) there was no way to limit who came over for a long time
3.) the land originally inhabited by Asians wasn't already occupied and stolen.
4.) The land occupied by Europeans and Americans was stolen from people they then mostly brutally murdered, stole their children from, and forced into camps.

You should consider not throwing stones, and maybe look up what merit means.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

the continued hook and reliance on off the shelf , or mass prescribed painkillers directly indicates a lack of post-op care , which is expensive to implement thoroughly. That ties in to being about money , or the lack of money being budgeted by the gov. (for one reason or another)

Sometimes people just take the pills because they were prescribed by their doctor, when the really don't need them.

I had two surgeries in 2016, arthroscopies on each of my hips, 6 weeks recovery each, to correct impingements and repair torn capsules. After each of them I got a box of oxycodone, and I never took even one of them.

I kept them on hand in case the pain became unbearable, but it never did. I had some pain and soreness, but nothing i couldn't put up with.

I get the feeling these things are just prescribed as part of standard procedure after a surgery, and most people just take them, because their doctor prescribed them (that means you must need them right?), when they would be just fine without them.

We have this messed up belief that no one should ever feel pain. That is stupid. A little pain can do you good.

I firmly believe that I healed faster and better after my surgeries because I was feeling pain. It gave me a constant reminder not to put weight on the leg, and to keep it in a way such that it heals, whereas if that pain were dulled, I might have messed it up and caused the healing to take longer or scar more.

Pain is the bodies messenger system. It tells you when you are doing something wrong. It's better to feel it than to mute it.

 

[farscapesg1]

how does properly funding "drug rehab + job training + job placement + welfare institution" not help?

The key word is "properly". So far the government hasn't proved to be able to do things properly on a reliable basis when it comes to welfare and homeless, IMO. Things like mandatory drug tests, parole-like check-ins with councilors and officers, weekly application/education quotas, etc. Career assistance needs to come with feedback from interviewing companies. "You referred Joe Smith to us and during the interview he didn't take it serious and just blew it off" = doesn't count as one of his 3 required application attempts for the week. But no.. people cry that it's too draconian and infringes on their rights so instead we just keep letting them fall through the cracks.

Continuing to throw more and more money at a problem isn't the solution.. but unfortunately too many people just start trying to pull at the heartstrings and use the "doing anything is better than nothing" approach. I'm not opposed to trying something.. with rules, deadlines and goalposts implemented... but also repercussions for failure. The possibility of being replaced at the next public vote has proven not to be enough of a repercussion as evidenced by the number of incumbents winning re-election each cycle. The politicians are too good at swaying public opinion to stay in place. They have to have real skin in the game like a failed attempt results in all their wages/earning/etc. garnished for the same number of years they implemented the taxes.

 

[next-Jin]

Just like LA they need to do a number of things that they don’t want to do. For starters they need to open up a lot more land for housing/zoning. They need to cut taxes across the board to incentivize private investment. I don’t mean cut taxes for the rich only, lower taxes on businesses, sales, individual, etc.

Homelessness is not the problem. The issue is cost of housing, low paying jobs and transportation. You can’t really tell people to commute 1 hr each way to work in a fast food restaurant.

It’s asinine to suggest more and more tax increases when the population outflow is the highest in the nation and it would only cause more homelessness because they don’t tackle the actual issues.

It also doesn’t help that CA state level taxes and regulations severely burdens cities to take apporiate steps.

 

[Krenum]

You do realize that:

1.) the immigration laws have always been incredibly racist, with quotas favoring "white" Europeans.
2.) there was no way to limit who came over for a long time
3.) the land originally inhabited by Asians wasn't already occupied and stolen.
4.) The land occupied by Europeans and Americans was stolen from people they then mostly brutally murdered, stole their children from, and forced into camps.

You should consider not throwing stones, and maybe look up what merit means.

History is violent & we all came from somewhere I do realize that. But we have laws in the modern world. Would you rather go back to the lawlessness of the old world? Any sane person would not.

 

[tempertantrum]

The key word is "properly". So far the government hasn't proved to be able to do things properly on a reliable basis when it comes to welfare and homeless, IMO. Things like mandatory drug tests, parole-like check-ins with councilors and officers, weekly application/education quotas, etc. Career assistance needs to come with feedback from interviewing companies. "You referred Joe Smith to us and during the interview he didn't take it serious and just blew it off" = doesn't count as one of his 3 required application attempts for the week. But no.. people cry that it's too draconian and infringes on their rights so instead we just keep letting them fall through the cracks.

Continuing to throw more and more money at a problem isn't the solution.. but unfortunately too many people just start trying to pull at the heartstrings and use the "doing anything is better than nothing" approach. I'm not opposed to trying something.. with rules, deadlines and goalposts implemented... but also repercussions for failure. The possibility of being replaced at the next public vote has proven not to be enough of a repercussion as evidenced by the number of incumbents winning re-election each cycle. The politicians are too good at swaying public opinion to stay in place. They have to have real skin in the game like a failed attempt results in all their wages/earning/etc. garnished for the same number of years they implemented the taxes.

1.) Most of the things you've required are already in place. It sounds like you've never applied for welfare, or known people who have tried...
2.) Where do these magical jobs come from? Most of the jobs being created are either high skill and relatively few in nature, or they are poverty level wages for service industry.
3.) Unemployment is already being pulled from people indirectly through employment taxes. They have already paid for it, and your suggestion essentially forces them to pay again.
4.) You make it sound like everyone who is homeless doesn't have a job. Many of them (especially in California) do. They just don't pay enough, even for high skill jobs.
5.) People aren't just "doing something," there happen to be experts in these areas, and most of them disagree with you.
6.) Drug testing is a waste of money, especially in an age where we have dysfunctional, well-paid CEOs and politicians running around doing drugs while forcing hard working poorer people who lead incredibly stressful lives to stop doing anything recreational to relax.

 

[lcpiper]

I'm opposed to forcing people to rely on (and therefore beholden to) religious institutions. Those institutions also have shown that even if they "work" they are manipulative and don't change things long-term, and still suffer from waste and fraud and mismanagement. At least with the government, we can have much easier oversite, are subject to FOIA, etc. If you believe that private industry (especially for-profit sectors) has your best interests at the forefront of their minds more than the government does, you're being willfully ignorant.

I don't think people not getting paid enough to live is them making up excuses. That's indentured servitude, and it's patently absurd.

Well if you think the answer is to create an entire welfare industry management, labor, offices, vehicles, training programs, etc, in order to provide assistance then I suppose we'll have more of the same as we have now. I'm thinking there is a cheaper way.

As for the excuses comment, again I need to issue a correction, I said "stop making excuses for them". I didn't say anything about their own excuses or accusing the homeless of making excuses.

Indentured servitude is wrong. It's also not what people are experiencing in the USA. I didn't suggest that we employ indentured servitude in any way, so I don't know where you are coming up with this.

You also seem really concerned with fraud or waste regarding this issue. For some reason, despite decades of experiences, you choose to believe that it's human organizations that are corrupt and not humans in general. It doesn't matter if those people are wearing a suite or robes, humans are corruptible. You can live with that reality and take advantage of existing social organizations to further your goals or raise an army of bureaucrats, functionaries, and drones to do it. My calculator says it's a hell of a lot cheaper and more effective to do it the old fashioned way.

 

[farscapesg1]

well considering white Americans are Illegal immigrants, why are you complaining?

As usual.. the "native" american idea is thrown out. Those native americans would be just as much of illegal immigrants using this ideology since the land was uninhabited before they crossed the land bridge. The key word is "illegal" and requires a legal system (laws) to be broken. Since the native Americans did not have a set of laws for people landing on the shores there is no way to prescribe what the European settlers were doing as "illegal". Likewise, not until the late 19th century did the United States have solidified laws for immigration, meaning those entering the country could not be considered illegal (or technically even legal) immigrants. After this time, yes the immigration rules have been racist and overly complicated IMO.. but it was also modified to attempt to level the playing field by capping the visas to 7% per nation. Did that affect Mexico worse than other countries... sure, but it was done to ease the racism against Asian countries. However, now that there are rules and laws on the books, there is a difference between "illegal" and "legal" immigration. Will those laws be changed in the future... maybe and I really hope so, but until then they are the laws in place for better or worse and require enforcement. I for one would not like to go back to the lawlessness of the past.

 

[lcpiper]

People have to go where jobs and money are. You can't expect to move in rural Nebraska and find a tech job - or two, if both parents want/need to work. Where do you suggest they go?

There are IT jobs all over the US, not just in Cali. But many people are a little short sighted when they chose jobs to pursue. I'm a sysad, I specialize in virtualization and storage systems. I work government contracts that require a security clearance, a line of work that takes a little extra to get into. But there are jobs and they pay, and some are in high cost of living areas and some are in areas I wouldn't want to live in. Here in Arizona, an hours drive south east of Tucson, I normally draw about $75-$80K a year. I just turned down a position offering $120K+ because I know the company and their full of shit. A few months in they'll make some excuse and cut me $40K and I won't work for those assholes. I'm not alone and they are having a hard time finding people cause they keep burning the workers here and so they are earning a rep. Before long they won't be able to meet their obligations under the contract and the government will give the contract to someone else, can't happen soon enough.

But there are jobs, hell even jobs overseas. I could get work in Germany, Japan, Korea, Kuwait, Quatar, even Australia. That's not even close to all the positions available. But some people are simply unwilling to do what they have to do. Their wants weight more then their needs. So they refuse to move, and they lose, and they cry, and they suck up support money all because they wouldn't face reality and give up what they were simply unwilling to give up. You can't help people like this.

 

[kohl]

This is a drastic oversimplification of things.

Generally economic success does require work, but more than anything else it requires pure old fashioned dumb luck. Luck in being born to a family that values education and teaches those values to their kids. Luck in being in the right place at the right time to get that promotion, etc. etc.

And as we become financially successful our monkey brains make us very good at distorting facts and justifying why we are so special to deserve these great things, and those other people aren't.

The truth is, the overwhelmingly largest predictor of financial success later in life is where and to whom you were born. After that, it is more dumb luck than anything else.

One of the more interesting concepts I remember from a college class was the concept of 'locus of control'
http://wilderdom.com/psychology/loc/LocusOfControlWhatIs.html

Your statement makes it sound like you have an external locus of control; you believe things just happen to you, good luck or bad luck and that there just isn't much you can do about it. I agree to some extent life is about random chance; applying for a job at the right time, interviewing when the interviewer happens to be in a good mood that day, whatever it is. That said, my locus of control is internal. I think by and large people have a lot of power over their lives, and people that consciously act to get to where they want to be, professionally or otherwise, are going to be a lot more successful as far as reaching their goals in life.

It annoys me to no end when someone bitches about their dead end job. I want to ask, what are you doing to improve your situation? I work in IT but the concept applies to other fields and disciplines; if you don't like where you are, take steps or acquire knowledge that makes you more sought after in your profession. Maybe instead of coming home and playing WoW or Fortnite, you could be tinkering in a home lab or researching things in your profession, getting a certification, etc. IMHO, hard work and a good work ethic are ultimately noticed by people and will move you forward in life.

 

[next-Jin]

There are IT jobs all over the US, not just in Cali. But many people are a little short sighted when they chose jobs to pursue. I'm a sysad, I specialize in virtualization and storage systems. I work government contracts that require a security clearance, a line of work that takes a little extra to get into. But there are jobs and they pay, and some are in high cost of living areas and some are in areas I wouldn't want to live in. Here in Arizona, an hours drive south east of Tucson, I normally draw about $75-$80K a year. I just turned down a position offering $120K+ because I know the company and their full of shit. A few months in they'll make some excuse and cut me $40K and I won't work for those assholes. I'm not alone and they are having a hard time finding people cause they keep burning the workers here and so they are earning a rep. Before long they won't be able to meet their obligations under the contract and the government will give the contract to someone else, can't happen soon enough.

But there are jobs, hell even jobs overseas. I could get work in Germany, Japan, Korea, Kuwait, Quatar, even Australia. That's not even close to all the positions available. But some people are simply unwilling to do what they have to do. Their wants weight more then their needs. So they refuse to move, and they lose, and they cry, and they suck up support money all because they wouldn't face reality and give up what they were simply unwilling to give up. You can't help people like this.

I wouldn’t use your situation as a be all for everyone.

I have a TS/SCI w/Poly and the moment I retire I’ll have 40 jobs lined up in IT in my area alone. DC Metro Area has hundreds.

My wife had the same clearance and it lapsed when I had to PCS to Fort Carson. There are 16 GIS openings in my area alone and not one of them she can get because her clearance just recently lapsed. She has 16 years of experience, worked for the NSA, DHS and contracted for General Dynamics. Due to the very specific nature of her work experience the only jobs she is qualified for she is not eligible for now.

I’m working on base trying to find exemptions to policies and other things but my point is those of us with clearances have high paying jobs in abdundance anywhere there’s a military base or in DC.

I’m not downplaying anything else you’ve said as I agree people need to get out of their comfort zone and be willing to move or learn new skills.

 

[lcpiper]

only Native Americans belong in America, return to whatever dump you came from.

Hmmmm, if I take this way-back machine you think exists, where "I came from", at that time, would have been one ancestor from England, and another from Norway.

I wouldn’t use your situation as a be all for everyone.

I have a TS/SCI w/Poly and the moment I retire I’ll have 40 jobs lined up in IT in my area alone. DC Metro Area has hundreds.

My wife had the same clearance and it lapsed when I had to PCS to Fort Carson. There are 16 GIS openings in my area alone and not one of them she can get because her clearance just recently lapsed. She has 16 years of experience, worked for the NSA, DHS and contracted for General Dynamics. Due to the very specific nature of her work experience the only jobs she is qualified for she is not eligible for now.

I’m working on base trying to find exemptions to policies and other things but my point is those of us with clearances have high paying jobs in abdundance anywhere there’s a military base or in DC.

I’m not downplaying anything else you’ve said as I agree people need to get out of their comfort zone and be willing to move or learn new skills.

Mine is up for re investigation now ...... equip


Sorry about your wife's clearance. There are still ways, might require her taking a job elsewhere for awhile, then catching back up with you when she can get a job local to you, or you to her. Kids?


EDIT: Forgive me guys, this should have been two separate posts.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

One of the more interesting concepts I remember from a college class was the concept of 'locus of control'
http://wilderdom.com/psychology/loc/LocusOfControlWhatIs.html

Your statement makes it sound like you have an external locus of control; you believe things just happen to you, good luck or bad luck and that there just isn't much you can do about it. I agree to some extent life is about random chance; applying for a job at the right time, interviewing when the interviewer happens to be in a good mood that day, whatever it is. That said, my locus of control is internal. I think by and large people have a lot of power over their lives, and people that consciously act to get to where they want to be, professionally or otherwise, are going to be a lot more successful as far as reaching their goals in life.

It annoys me to no end when someone bitches about their dead end job. I want to ask, what are you doing to improve your situation? I work in IT but the concept applies to other fields and disciplines; if you don't like where you are, take steps or acquire knowledge that makes you more sought after in your profession. Maybe instead of coming home and playing WoW or Fortnite, you could be tinkering in a home lab or researching things in your profession, getting a certification, etc. IMHO, hard work and a good work ethic are ultimately noticed by people and will move you forward in life.

I am familiar with the concept.

The thing is, fully external and fully Internal locuses of control are extreme concepts that don't truly exist.

Everything in life is a combination of the two. If you want to succeed, you have to get out of bed and do something, so you do have control in that regard.

Outcomes - however - once you meet these basic requirements have statistically been shown to only have a loose correlation to the capabilities, work ethic, etc. of the individual.

The key to success is to get started, and to stick with it. After that, it's mostly random.


Successful people tend to overestimate how much control they have over their outcomes, and unsuccessful people tend to underestimate their control.

This TED talk discusses a really interesting study where people who played a monopoly game they know was intentionally rigged in their favor still took most of the credit for winning, which I found fascinating.

Our Monkey Brains are so good at self deception it is scary.

 

[capt_cope]

I am familiar with he concept.

The thing is, fully external and fully Internal locuses of control are extreme concepts that don't truly exist.

Everything in life is a combination of the two. If you want to succeed, you have to get out of bed and do something, so you do have control in that regard.

Outcomes - however - once you meet these basic requirements have statistically been shown to only have a loose correlation to the capabilities, work ethic, etc. of the individual.

The key to success is to get started. After that, it's mostly random.

The key to success is to get started, then keep working to improve what you can control, so that you're ready when events outside your control offer opportunity.

 

[TheCommander]

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?

How about cutting government spending? Why is that raising taxes is the most common solution to money issues.

 

[TheCommander]

well considering white Americans are Illegal immigrants, why are you complaining?

You need to look up the definition of immigrant. People born here are not "immigrants." They are called Americans and live here legally.

And besides that, money should be spent on Americans and legal immigrants. There are enough Americans and legal immigrants in need already.

 

[tempertantrum]

You need to look up the definition of immigrant. People born here are not "immigrants." They are called Americans and live here legally.

And besides that, money should be spent on Americans and legal immigrants. There are enough Americans and legal immigrants in need already.

Are you suggesting that the Native Americans were cool with us taking over their land? Like... because it wasn't American law, so it doesn't matter?

I'd also like to point out that in the past the immigrants weren't "just immigrants," they were also political and economic refugees. I feel like so many people forget that they literally just came over here, they got their papers at the border, and then were simply let in. The modern rules about immigration aren't because there's no room for them, or because they are a drain on the system. (in fact, undocumented immigrants are a crucial part of our economy, we'd practically starve and have no new construction without them.) These laws are specifically to keep out "people we don't like," which is, and always has been, racist AF.

 

[Krenum]

(in fact, undocumented immigrants are a crucial part of our economy, we'd practically starve and have no new construction without them.) These laws are specifically to keep out "people we don't like," which is, and always has been, racist AF.

BULL FUCKIN SHIT.


Nobody I know would put down a job to feed their family. And we have more than enough people already here (legal immigrant Americans & Americans already born here) to do the jobs required.

People that don't want to work or just want to live off the government tit are what San Francisco is experiencing now.

 

[TheCommander]

Are you suggesting that the Native Americans were cool with us taking over their land? Like... because it wasn't American law, so it doesn't matter?

I'd also like to point out that in the past the immigrants weren't "just immigrants," they were also political and economic refugees. I feel like so many people forget that they literally just came over here, they got their papers at the border, and then were simply let in. The modern rules about immigration aren't because there's no room for them, or because they are a drain on the system. (in fact, undocumented immigrants are a crucial part of our economy, we'd practically starve and have no new construction without them.) These laws are specifically to keep out "people we don't like," which is, and always has been, racist AF.

It sucks for what happened to people in the past but times have changed and borders have changed throughout history. Immigration laws need to be obeyed otherwise we have a free for all at the border.

The country wouldn't be starving and construction would continue without a problem. Greedy agricultural companies only use illegals to maximize their profits. The huge majority of construction is done by legal immigrants and American workers. Illegals are good at screwing up wages for low skilled American workers though, with large amounts of these low skilled workers being minorities who are competing to an extent with illegals for some of these low skilled jobs. So in the end, their just screwing over Americans of all races and helping create a larger gap between rich and poor.

 

[mlcarson]

The problems with SFC will take care of themselves over time -- just not in the way that the residents want. It's quickly becoming an undesirable place to live. Once that happens and the employers leave, the housing prices will start coming down. I doubt that it'll ever become like Detroit but it's the people in charge are following that model.
The things that really need to be done cannot be done by the politicians there. The homeless issue needs to be solved by either passing new mental health laws allowing involuntary institutionalization or just start incarcerating them for the tiniest violation of existing laws. I'd also allow early release for anybody willing to relocate to some other town. If I were in SFC, I'd bus as many of the homeless as possible to LA or San Diego. The homeless that are not mentally ill just need to move to another state where the cost of living is lower and there are better job prospects. Anything to help people by keeping them in SFC is just going to make the problem worse.

 

[lcpiper]

Are you suggesting that the Native Americans were cool with us taking over their land? Like... because it wasn't American law, so it doesn't matter?

I'd also like to point out that in the past the immigrants weren't "just immigrants," they were also political and economic refugees. I feel like so many people forget that they literally just came over here, they got their papers at the border, and then were simply let in. The modern rules about immigration aren't because there's no room for them, or because they are a drain on the system. (in fact, undocumented immigrants are a crucial part of our economy, we'd practically starve and have no new construction without them.) These laws are specifically to keep out "people we don't like," which is, and always has been, racist AF.

Ummm, no.

I mean, you are correct about the old days, people running from overbearing rule, which followed us so we had to fight for the freedom we have. But your idea that people came over and were given papers and just let in, it's a little simplistic and actually wrong in many cases. Look, immigration to the US wasn't something that just happened for awhile and you can character it one way. It's been a 200+ year process that has evolved over time. Some people immigrated to French or Spanish colonies and not through New England ports. They settled Florida and Louisiana and Texas and were only later joined the USA.

As for "no new construction" without them, bunk. Companies doing construction work use the cheapest labor they can lay their hands on typically. If it's immigrants then it's immigrants, if it's imported Chinese labor then that's what it is. If it's people from the South or the North East or wherever then that is what they will use. And if you can't get immigrants, ie cheaper labor, then it just costs you more and you hire who you can. You can't sell us on the idea that if we hadn't had any immigrants for construction then lazy assed Americans wouldn't ever build anything.

And the Native American Indian ....... I'm sure the Native Americans of the day weren't happy with it, they fought a few wars over it, got the short end of some treaties as well. Does go hand in hand with being the loser in a war though. Never saw any country go to war and come out smelling like roses at the end after losing said struggle. A few do come back better than you'd think, but that isn't a historical norm.

What I can't stomach is this idea that we should all feel guilty for what other people, people who have been dead a hundred years now, did to the American Indians. I hold no animosity, no old grudge, no hate or unfriendly thought towards people I don't know and haven't met. I'd rather just get along. You can correct me if I am wrong, I'd rather know what I'm talking about, but I don't think anyone is keeping them hold up on the rez.

 

[c3k]

Illegal aliens are not required for the country to function. They do, however, perform 2 functions; they enrich corporations (the very entities liberals say they oppose due to their oppressive and bad natures); and, more importantly, they swell the ranks of the needy, giving political power to the liberals and thereby cover for more government funding. There's an added liberal bonus: after looting the wealth from others and giving it to the illegal aliens, the liberals then weaken the voting laws to ensure that the illegal aliens and their spawn will vote for the liberals.

The rule of law is immaterial to liberals. Power is all.

 

[Krenum]

Illegal aliens are not required for the country to function. They do, however, perform 2 functions; they enrich corporations (the very entities liberals say they oppose due to their oppressive and bad natures); and, more importantly, they swell the ranks of the needy, giving political power to the liberals and thereby cover for more government funding. There's an added liberal bonus: after looting the wealth from others and giving it to the illegal aliens, the liberals then weaken the voting laws to ensure that the illegal aliens and their spawn will vote for the liberals.

The rule of law is immaterial to liberals. Power is all.

Exactly.

 

[lcpiper]

I'm not going down this path, it leads to a locked icon on the thread

 

[rudy]

The problems with SFC will take care of themselves over time -- just not in the way that the residents want. It's quickly becoming an undesirable place to live. Once that happens and the employers leave, the housing prices will start coming down. I doubt that it'll ever become like Detroit but it's the people in charge are following that model.

haha why do you doubt that? Detroit was once the premier US city with all the advantages just like SF has now in a little over 1 generation they degraded to one of the worst cities in the USA. I bet people in Detroit thought there was no way in a million years what it looks like now would be possible.

 

[theBrownLlama]

The key word is "properly". So far the government hasn't proved to be able to do things properly on a reliable basis when it comes to welfare and homeless, IMO. Things like mandatory drug tests, parole-like check-ins with councilors and officers, weekly application/education quotas, etc. Career assistance needs to come with feedback from interviewing companies. "You referred Joe Smith to us and during the interview he didn't take it serious and just blew it off" = doesn't count as one of his 3 required application attempts for the week. But no.. people cry that it's too draconian and infringes on their rights so instead we just keep letting them fall through the cracks.

Continuing to throw more and more money at a problem isn't the solution.. but unfortunately too many people just start trying to pull at the heartstrings and use the "doing anything is better than nothing" approach. I'm not opposed to trying something.. with rules, deadlines and goalposts implemented... but also repercussions for failure. The possibility of being replaced at the next public vote has proven not to be enough of a repercussion as evidenced by the number of incumbents winning re-election each cycle. The politicians are too good at swaying public opinion to stay in place. They have to have real skin in the game like a failed attempt results in all their wages/earning/etc. garnished for the same number of years they implemented the taxes.

who do you suggest to take up this thankless job if not the gov?

 

[tempertantrum]

haha why do you doubt that? Detroit was once the premier US city with all the advantages just like SF has now in a little over 1 generation they degraded to one of the worst cities in the USA. I bet people in Detroit thought there was no way in a million years what it looks like now would be possible.

I'm from Detroit. Born and raised. That's not even remotely how it happened. It was already having troubles before WWII (everyone was, because of the depression). After WWII (the even into the 60's and 70's) the cash for housing was flowing pretty freely, but there were restrictions, but official and unofficial depending on the time period, in which black people were either not given any money or only granted mortgages inside certain areas, and white people were only granted mortgages outside of those areas. The line in Detroit was 8mile, and the redlining continued (unofficially) even into the 90's and 2000's with some mortgage companies (think Bank of America). This depressed house prices for generations (not a single generation, that idea is utter BS), and to this day prevents people who live in Detroit from participating in the housing booms, developing property-based "nest eggs," and in general acquiring wealth the way whites in the area did (check out Bloomfield Hills, Birmingham, etc.). This literally left the poor Detroit filled with the poor black people who were either the children or grandchildren of slaves that migrated north for jobs to places like Detroit stuck with no way to get out. Because of this, and the collapse of the auto industry, Detroit remains one of the poorest, most segregated places in the country. That doesn't even take into account things like the racism of the state as far as the allocation of funds for things like infrastructure, development, and education, the fact that the city was made for 2 million people and the white flight forced the poorest people to try to support that infrastructure so there are some of the highest tax levels in the state, the fact that the bus system is literally set up so there is ONE way for people to ride out of the city for jobs, and things like the "war on drugs" which specifically targeted the kinds of drugs people of color tended to use, etc. etc. etc. This is starting to change, as the rich children of the whites who abandoned Detroit now are returning and buying up the now incredibly cheap property and gentrifying parts of the city, but that typically doesn't benefit the people who suffered and struggled to get along without any support in the meantime. Now, before you start saying some BS about bootstraps, let me tell you, having been a teacher in the area including in some of the roughest schools you can imagine, it is *incredibly* difficult for kids to "make it" out of that kind of generational poverty. I wasn't any smarter or harder working than the others, I was just lucky. Most parents of my students were working 2-3 jobs just to get by, leaving kids all alone. (There is no day care in many places, and many people can't afford them when there are. When people get in troubles there's really not great places to turn for help or support or a hand up. The system is designed to keep people down with quirks like if you make enough money you get kicked off welfare so you ultimately make less money, trapping people in limbo. There's few investors (and the ones there are only invest in white people in white or gentrified areas), the churches do a terrible job doing anything other than a bit of food and maybe a nights rest. Maybe. Nothing to help give you a hand up, and are usually pretty manipulative.

So... shut your pie hole when it comes to Detroit, because you are ignorant AF. California will continue to support the mostly white and affluent SF - it is nothing like Detroit.

 

[cdr_74_premium]

word

Preach on.

Still, I am afraid it falls on deaf ears. Some people never experienced a reality in which there's just no way out, only because you have the "wrong" ethnicity. They can't relate, so it must be laziness.

 

[c3k]

So, Detroit’s fall was and is due to racism? How can that be, with entrenched liberal Democrats having been in power for literally generations? Unless this means that liberal Democrats are racist...oh, wait.

 

[tempertantrum]

So, Detroit’s fall was and is due to racism? How can that be, with entrenched liberal Democrats having been in power for literally generations? Unless this means that liberal Democrats are racist...oh, wait.

Detroit has been treated like dirt by the state and there were openly racist national and state and even private industry policies for decades. Many of the informal policies are still in place for private industry. A great example of this is the interaction of all the rich white kids moving into Detroit, but not changing their addresses from their parent's houses in the burbs. That way, they don't have to pay taxes in Detroit, and they don't have to pay Detroit insurance rates, while the real Detroiters are stuck footing the bill for their use of the infrastructure. This, in turn, pushes the Detroit rates up even further. So maybe it's not nearly as much active racism, but it's still a systematic problem of bias that leads to incredible racial disparity. Detroit doesn't exist in a vacuum, and it doesn't exist, at any given point in time, out of context of it's history. It's really hard to dig yourself out of a hole when people are actively shoveling into it, and you aren't allowed to have a shovel yourself.

I get and appreciate that you're trying to think about ways to fix the system, but please stop parading your ignorance. The devil/god is in the details when it comes to complex systems, and you don't know them. Try getting a better perspective before judging.

 

[lcpiper]

who do you suggest to take up this thankless job if not the gov?

There was a time when it was family and church for starters ....... individual cities have run soup kitchens, still do. You know what we didn't used to do? We didn't hire 200,000 government workers, build entire buildings, setup computer networks and raise a Federal Government organ to rival any other department to include the DoD.

We didn't used to do that.

Not every State has the same homeless issues/burdens. Not every city does either, some do rise to top of the homeless barrel. Do you imagine that all the homeless in SF are from the local population, that SF simply has a way of producing homelessness?

Or do you think SF has a reputation that draws homeless "immigrants"?

I don't know the numbers, but I have no doubt it's a good bit of both.

Where do youth that are homeless, runaways, etc, where do they like to go? I believe that, for awhile it was Portland and Seattle. This isn't for no reason. They here that they can make it out there so they go.

It's my opinion that if you take care of people, most people will let you. So if you are too generous helping the needy, you'll just get more needy to look after.

 

[tempertantrum]

There was a time when it was family and church for starters ....... individual cities have run soup kitchens, still do. You know what we didn't used to do? We didn't hire 200,000 government workers, build entire buildings, setup computer networks and raise a Federal Government organ to rival any other department to include the DoD.

We didn't used to do that.

Not every State has the same homeless issues/burdens. Not every city does either, some do rise to top of the homeless barrel. Do you imagine that all the homeless in SF are from the local population, that SF simply has a way of producing homelessness?

Or do you think SF has a reputation that draws homeless "immigrants"?

I don't know the numbers, but I have no doubt it's a good bit of both.

Where do youth that are homeless, runaways, etc, where do they like to go? I believe that, for awhile it was Portland and Seattle. This isn't for no reason. They here that they can make it out there so they go.

It's my opinion that if you take care of people, most people will let you. So if you are too generous helping the needy, you'll just get more needy to look after.

Again, given the required separation of church and state, why should a state be relying on (and therefore beholden to and manipulated by) a church? I find it incredibly problematic and borderline unconstitutional.

Have you actually looked at the research on homelessness? You don't have to idly speculate and armchair quarterback this, you know.

As far as your assertion about "if you take care of people, most people will let you" have you ever tried talking to a homeless person? Most people *hate* having to take handouts. So go on. Talk to them. They love talking to people, for the most part, if you are seeing them on the street. Try it, instead of making ridiculous assumptions and assertions and taking them as fact. One note: don't be an ass to them, treat them like a human being doing their best. Then we can have more of a constructive conversation about this.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

required separation of church and state

What required separation?

 

[c3k]

Detroit has been treated like dirt by the state and there were openly racist national and state and even private industry policies for decades. Many of the informal policies are still in place for private industry. A great example of this is the interaction of all the rich white kids moving into Detroit, but not changing their addresses from their parent's houses in the burbs. That way, they don't have to pay taxes in Detroit, and they don't have to pay Detroit insurance rates, while the real Detroiters are stuck footing the bill for their use of the infrastructure. This, in turn, pushes the Detroit rates up even further. So maybe it's not nearly as much active racism, but it's still a systematic problem of bias that leads to incredible racial disparity. Detroit doesn't exist in a vacuum, and it doesn't exist, at any given point in time, out of context of it's history. It's really hard to dig yourself out of a hole when people are actively shoveling into it, and you aren't allowed to have a shovel yourself.

I get and appreciate that you're trying to think about ways to fix the system, but please stop parading your ignorance. The devil/god is in the details when it comes to complex systems, and you don't know them. Try getting a better perspective before judging.

Reading your response, it seems like you're against one group, A, having to subsidize another group, B, living among them. Funny. You say "rich white kids" for B and "real Detroiters" for A. Me? I'm against any forced subsidies. No group should have to pay for another.

Detroit's problems are not racial in nature. The result of Detroit's problems has been an overwhelmingly black and poor population. However, what led to that was years of wealth redistribution. When you tax group A to pay for group B, anyone in group who can leave, will do so. That creates a spiraling problem which exacerbates the issue. This is what San Fran is experiencing. Target the rich? Well, they have the best ability to relocate. And they will.

Liberals use taxation policy to effect behavioral change. This is under the guise of enforced morality: tax big drinks to reduce obesity; tax cigarettes to reduce cancer, etc. ("It's for your own good." Couple with, "Our tax and social policies mean that YOUR sickness is costing OTHERS money, so we get a say in how you behave." This is the root of socialist control and imposing their morality on population.)

Given that the basis of liberal taxation is to change behavior away from the taxed behavior, why would anyone be surprised when the tax on living somewhere increases and that causes those taxed individuals to NOT live there? If it works for 64 ounce Big Gulps why would it not work for a home?

The only one parading ignorance is you. The liberal bent towards increasing government control via policies, zoning, taxation, etc, only amount to a tightening of a fist on a choked system. Relax the grip and it will recover. It's been proven time and time again.

Nagasaki and Hiroshima were reduced to rubble while Detroit was thriving. Now? Well, there's a meme going around that it's better to be nuked than to suffer under 40-60 years of Democrat rule.

Socialism kills the soul, then it kills the society.

 

[cdr_74_premium]

It's my opinion that if you take care of people, most people will let you. So if you are too generous helping the needy, you'll just get more needy to look after.

Spoken like a true feudal lord.


In the meantime...

Now you may wonder how I am so sure the guy isn't "playing the victim". The exact same thing happened to me and my wife when we were living in an university residence in Ontario, Canada.

You always think it's bullshit, crying foul. Until it happens to you.

 

[lcpiper]

Again, given the required separation of church and state, why should a state be relying on (and therefore beholden to and manipulated by) a church? I find it incredibly problematic and borderline unconstitutional.

Have you actually looked at the research on homelessness? You don't have to idly speculate and armchair quarterback this, you know.

As far as your assertion about "if you take care of people, most people will let you" have you ever tried talking to a homeless person? Most people *hate* having to take handouts. So go on. Talk to them. They love talking to people, for the most part, if you are seeing them on the street. Try it, instead of making ridiculous assumptions and assertions and taking them as fact. One note: don't be an ass to them, treat them like a human being doing their best. Then we can have more of a constructive conversation about this.

I see the concern on separation of church and state. But I'll add or clarify a little. If the Federal Government greatly curtailed their efforts at helping the homeless, the immediate effect would be a lessening in the moneys collected in Federal Taxes for that purpose. These moneys would essentially be left in our own pockets to do with as we please. Now it falls to the State and Local governments. Your citizenry has more free money, their tax burdens are lessened, you are now free to increase State taxes in support of the homeless or seek another avenue of relief for them. Personal donations to charities are frequently tax deductions that citizens with additional income frequently avail themselves of.

Promote this. Make it worthwhile for people to give to the needy. If we back off the taxes then this money is available for that purpose, make it worthwhile to do. Make it a big deal, promote it. The tax money isn't just the money that the feds aren't "giving/spending" on the needy, it's also all the management that goes into managing these programs that is saved. That is a lot of extra that the Feds don't need. The States should actually take the hint and follow suite backing off the Taxes and support programs freeing up the money. Poorer people pay less taxes, a win for them, fewer on the edge of needing help. The middle income types can get some breaks to lessen their own tax burden further, charitable contributions need to be seized and taken advantage of if only for our own self interest.

So now, money is available, none government organizations that mostly already exist are now looking after distribution and management. And there are already government organizations that are watchdogs over these charities, beef them up some to help curb the corruption not with an unrealistic goal of zero %, but a realistic one of, "are we far better than before?"

This is the direction I am suggesting we all take a hard look at.

Ohh, and for those who do give at the church, more money might mean more in the plate, and for those Mormons, their tithe, if I spelled it right, is a percentage.

 

[Jagger100]

Detroit has been treated like dirt by the state....

In a way this is correct. Detroit was neglected by the state wrt arresting and removing corrupt political leaders. So much so, the Feds got involved trying to do the State's job for it a la the Untouchables. I will say both Democrats and the RINO Republicans the state produces for Governors were responsible.

 

[lcpiper]

Spoken like a true feudal lord.


In the meantime...

Now you may wonder how I am so sure the guy isn't "playing the victim". The exact same thing happened to me and my wife when we were living in an university residence in Ontario, Canada.

You always think it's bullshit, crying foul. Until it happens to you.

So your experience stands for ALL of them?

You would ride the pony some none of them would? And at the same time we all know there are sleazes that take it even further and panhandle for extra income while they have nice cars in their garages. There's no room for a middle ground.

It's all or nothing with some people.

 

[cdr_74_premium]

So your experience stands for ALL of them?

No. And neither does yours, or anyone else's.

Problem is, if you're white, chances are you will have no clue, no matter where you go. Bonus points for blonde hair and/or light colored eyes.

Others, such as me, didn't have to deal with any of that crap in the places they were born, but got a taste when they went abroad. My skin is white and I look european - most people guess Eastern European for some weird reason, as my ancestry goes nowhere near there. Still, as soon as they hear where I really come from, I can see many of them changing their posture towards me instantly. And I am not sensitive to subtle clues like that AT. ALL.

You would ride the pony some none of them would? And at the same time we all know there are sleazes that take it even further and panhandle for extra income while they have nice cars in their garages. There's no room for a middle ground.

It's all or nothing with some people.

That's exactly what I am talking about. Just read my previous entries on this thread.

It's not a binary thing for sure. Saying that's the only thing that can possibly ever happen is as naive as saying it's all in their heads and nothing is going on, they just have to try harder.