Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Homeless encampment grows on Apple property in Silicon Valley

mercurynews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 108 posts

Re: Homeless encampment grows on Apple property in Silicon Valley

#61

Post by lumost »

fshbbdssbbgdd wrote: post #13
na85 wrote: post #7

Instead of stroking his ego by racing Branson to space, Bezos could personally buy each of these people a home in the Bay Area and wouldn't even notice a difference in his lifestyle. Tax the rich. Spend it on social programs.

Who’s Bezos supposed to buy the homes from? It seems like there is already a higher than average number of people living per house here, so distribution of housing is not really the problem. The total number of homes is too low. It would help if Bezos could build a huge number of new housing units, but that’s illegal (which is the problem).

Start ratcheting up the property tax to improve utilization. Unaffordable homes are only affordable if the cash flow requirements are low.

If there was an extra 3-6% property tax, it would align interests towards construction and punish speculators.

Re: Homeless encampment grows on Apple property in Silicon Valley

#62

Post by Sebguer »

ZephyrBlu wrote: post #53
freen wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

~500k homeless in the country. [0] Average monthly rent in the US:~ $1000 [1] Bezos net worth: $213 billion [2] Average return on investment for DJIA for the past ten years: 10.6% [3] Paying rent for all homeless folks is $6 billion a year. Bezos, if he makes average returns, makes $21.3 Billion a year. He can afford it. And still e one the richest people in the world. How do you live with that? 0: https://en.m.wikip…

If Bezos can afford it, the government can afford it. So why don't they do it?

Mainly because our government is entirely captive to people like Bezos.

Re: Homeless encampment grows on Apple property in Silicon Valley

#63

Post by lettergram »

sammalloy wrote: post #17
lettergram wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not why they are homeless.

"A chronically homeless person costs the tax payer an average of $35,578 per year. Costs on average are reduced by 49.5% when they are placed in supportive housing. Supportive housing costs on average $12,800, making the net savings roughly $4,800 per year." This has been known for a long time. It costs the public less to provide direct federal and state-financed housing for the homeless than to keep them on the stre…

People don't become homeless because they run out of resources, they become homeless because they run out of relationships.

What you're proposing is me, in another state, city, neighborhood, paying for your states issue(s). My neighborhood, state and city has no homeless issue. In part because we have functioning churches, family units, etc

In SF, a portion choose to be homeless (have you ever asked them? I have). Many couldn't handle or don't want to handle the public housing (which SF has) requirements.

> Finland and many other countries do this and they have the happiest people in the world.

Finally, some facts -- they are "happy" because they have a functioning, nationalistic and proud culture. Aka their society works. This keeps people from being homeless, lowers drug abuse rates, etc

- 83% of the country has a man and a women with or without children married or co-habitating [1]

- ~100% white, 93% Finn

- 88% Speak Finnish as their first language

- 71% Lutheran

[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/1101541/families-by-type...

Re: Homeless encampment grows on Apple property in Silicon Valley

#64

Post by fshbbdssbbgdd »

na85 wrote: post #45
fshbbdssbbgdd wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who’s Bezos supposed to buy the homes from? It seems like there is already a higher than average number of people living per house here, so distribution of housing is not really the problem. The total number of homes is too low. It would help if Bezos could build a huge number of new housing units, but that’s illegal (which is the problem).

My point, which seems to have soared over the heads of my detractors in this thread, is that the ultra rich should be taxed at a higher rate, and that money used to fund programs that combat homelessness. Jeff Bezos and the other dragons^H^H^H^H^H^H^H billionaires have demonstrably too much wealth, to the extent that they can afford dick-measuring contests like "whose CEO can get to space first, for no reason whatsoe…

A fine opinion, but the only nexus to the news story we are commenting on is the exhortation for Bezos to go buy a bunch of houses (which would only push prices even higher and make somebody else homeless).

Re: Homeless encampment grows on Apple property in Silicon Valley

#65

Post by judge2020 »

monkeybutton wrote: post #46
CryptoPunk wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You not solving their/society's problem doesn't make it unethical.

Maybe if they'd paid their fair share in taxes, they'd feel less guilty about the ethics. As it stands, they're not exactly helping society fix these problems.

For reference: https://thehill.com/policy/technology/401776-apple-argued-it...

Re: Homeless encampment grows on Apple property in Silicon Valley

#66

Post by guerrilla »

oliv__ wrote: post #23

"Clearing the camp likely will be difficult both logistically — it’s more challenging to remove structures and vehicles that don’t run than tents — and ethically — there are few places for the displaced residents to go." This might be an unpopular opinion, but since when did kicking "a sprawling camp of dozens of people, a maze of broken-down vehicles and a massive amount of trash" off of your private property become…

When? Always. Good luck finding a popular ethical system where it's moral to have millions of times more than you need while others have nothing and then turn then away: Christianity, Islam, Utilitarianism, Buddhism...

Re: Homeless encampment grows on Apple property in Silicon Valley

#67

Post by whynotminot »

hourislate wrote: post #41
whynotminot wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine being this clueless about how cafeterias work when the employees aren’t in the office.

Imagine being so dumb to think some aren't open since there are a handful of employees there or opening a few since there would be homeless there.

When there’s a “handful of employees there” cafeterias aren’t open and you’re lucky to have the staff keeping the coffee pots going. Have you not been to “the office” even once over the last 18 months?

Re: Homeless encampment grows on Apple property in Silicon Valley

#68

Post by sp332 »

throwawayboise wrote: post #36
sp332 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is in the part you quoted - when you get them off your property, they don't stop existing. Where do you want them to go to ?

Go to being a responsible person. Some of these people are mentally ill. Many others are just content to live a minimal existence, getting high, and not following any of the rules that normal people do. I see no reason to offer them support in that lifestyle.

This is irrelevant. SF has very low supply of housing and very high homelessness compared to other places. It could happen to basically anybody. One person in the article physically built her own house and then was kicked out by her ex-boyfriend. That person sounds way more responsible than I am, and I'm not homeless.

https://www.independent.co.uk/extras/lifestyle/silicon-valle...

Re: Homeless encampment grows on Apple property in Silicon Valley

#69

Post by awsthro00945 »

CryptoPunk wrote: post #35
sp332 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is in the part you quoted - when you get them off your property, they don't stop existing. Where do you want them to go to ?

You not solving their/society's problem doesn't make it unethical.

Apple is part of this society, and has a responsibility (not to mention a direct interest) in helping to solve, or at the very least to not make worse, its society's problems.

The same goes for you, by the way.

Re: Homeless encampment grows on Apple property in Silicon Valley

#70

Post by epistasis »

na85 wrote: post #45
fshbbdssbbgdd wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who’s Bezos supposed to buy the homes from? It seems like there is already a higher than average number of people living per house here, so distribution of housing is not really the problem. The total number of homes is too low. It would help if Bezos could build a huge number of new housing units, but that’s illegal (which is the problem).

My point, which seems to have soared over the heads of my detractors in this thread, is that the ultra rich should be taxed at a higher rate, and that money used to fund programs that combat homelessness. Jeff Bezos and the other dragons^H^H^H^H^H^H^H billionaires have demonstrably too much wealth, to the extent that they can afford dick-measuring contests like "whose CEO can get to space first, for no reason whatsoe…

The problem here is not the ultra rich, it's the moderately rich that are blocking housing.

There's more than enough money for people to pay for the building and maintenance, it's just that local land owners have said "we don't want to share"

All of Bezos' money isn't going to fix that problem. The problem here is wealth inequality, but it's the inequality of land wealth, not dollar wealth. The problem is excessive greed, not of Bezos, but of local homeowners and politicians. A former mayor literally joked about building a wall around Cupertino. That is the asshole that needs to be backed against a wall to fix this problem.

Post reply on HN