31–40 of 184 posts
Man, I did not sign up to subsidize the homeless of the entire western US, and neither did my fellow Californians. We definitely need to reduce the social programs and put that $20bn somewhere else. No matter how you slice it, $609,000/yr per homeless person is simply absurd.
Who do you trust to put twenty billion dollars "somewhere else?"
600k per year per person? With that amount of funding you may as well buy every homeless person a house
Nevertheless, the current strategy does not seem particularly effective.
Man, I did not sign up to subsidize the homeless of the entire western US, and neither did my fellow Californians. We definitely need to reduce the social programs and put that $20bn somewhere else. No matter how you slice it, $609,000/yr per homeless person is simply absurd.
Where should the money go if not the social safety net? Will your suggestion get people off the streets? Or should they just rot there?
> Mayor London Breed threw her hands up in response. “We can’t force people to accept or stay in shelters and we’re unable to prevent people from setting up an encampment in an area that was just cleaned. This is the situation we are in,” she tweeted Wednesday. > She’s right. San Francisco is under a federal injunction that bars officials from enforcing laws against camping or sleeping in public spaces as long as its…
This is literally the opener to the article. The whole argument it is making is a complete mess.
https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/federal-judge-refuses-to...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where should the money go if not the social safety net? Will your suggestion get people off the streets? Or should they just rot there?
A safety net is unemployment insurance. What this is isn’t a safety net but rather a hammock.
Because the bay area is home to many extremely rich people who give absolutely nothing back to their communities, encourage rampant gentrification and generally despise poor people and advocate for anti-worker policies. Take a scroll through the likes of some of the famous VCs who constantly complain about SF's homelessness and crime. They tend to be more mask off far-right in their likes vs tweets (some will straigh…
Who is the one not giving back to the community, the billionaire VC who is funding hundreds of high-paying jobs, or the person who shits in the street and demands to be fed and provided with a host of other services at no cost to himself?
600k per year per person? With that amount of funding you may as well buy every homeless person a house
It's like taking the entire school budget, dividing it by the number of first graders, and then saying that's how much we spend per student. It's stupid math that is only used to mislead.
it was a mecca before this. 2014 was about 12-18 months into the tent encampment era (especially around the mission and Division) of homelessness though it was rapidly expanding in numbers and neighborhoods then and after that. Before that, 2012 and before, homelessness in the city tended to look more like people sleeping in doorways.
I think it's important to note a couple of things. > The city of San Francisco released data last week showing that 55% of homeless individuals rejected shelter when offered it I think it's very important to understand why people turn down the beds. There are several reasons- * Shelters have very restricted hours, so if someone has a job that includes nights they likely can't use a shelter. A large number of homeless…
* Drugs and alcohol are not allowed