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

San Francisco voters approve taxes on highly paid CEOs, big businesses

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 754 posts

Re: San Francisco voters approve taxes on highly paid CEOs, big businesses

#551

Post by dminvs »

austincheney wrote: post #521
mrits wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can purchase a 5K sqft lot outside of Austin for $2,200 and we still have a growing homeless problem. I'd look more into providing mental health, relocation, and incentives to stay off heavy drugs.

Fort Worth is in the same state, almost the same population, growing just as fast, and has similar taxes. Yet Fort Worth doesn’t have the visible homeless problem that Austin and San Francisco do.

This is partly because the private security force employed by the wealthy Bass brothers forcefully (and sometimes violently) discourage the homeless from existing in downtown Fort Worth, especially the Sundance Square area.

I used to work downtown (Oil & Gas Commerce building) and became friends with the night-shift security guard, who told some really shocking stories about how the Bass goons would drag the homeless into alleys and beat them, simply for existing in downtown Ft. Worth.

Re: San Francisco voters approve taxes on highly paid CEOs, big businesses

#552

Post by noobermin »

textech wrote: post #31

San Francisco is the 16th largest city by population and has a budget of around 14 billion which is like 6 or 7 times larger than many cities with much bigger population. This is just a badly run city and throwing more money at their problems isn't going to help them.

It's surprising that you can't conceive of a tax being confiscatory instead of merely being for the paying of something.

Re: San Francisco voters approve taxes on highly paid CEOs, big businesses

#553

Post by digitaltrees »

GhostVII wrote: post #309

San Francisco's solution to everything seems to be to just keep raising taxes, and throwing money at things which don't work. At some point you have to realize that more money isn't always the solution, you actually have to fix your beurocracy. It's insane to me that the city with so many rich people and incredibly valuable companies is such a mess, your telling me that a small city with an incredibly wealthy populat…

Who buys products when 1% of the population has most of the resources? Henry Ford was a capitalist, be he recognized that production required buyers. Buyers need money. Income inequality concentrates that money.

I am excited to see a new generation of corporate leaders rediscover stakeholder capitalism and reject shareholder primacy. Pay employees more, reduce leadership pay and watch markets expand as a result.

Re: San Francisco voters approve taxes on highly paid CEOs, big businesses

#554

Post by mdorazio »

rmk wrote: post #535
sroussey wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was upped to about $600m. Good luck getting an audit.

Okay, that is something on the order of $10,000 per person if there's a homeless population of 60,000 people. I doubt if SF has such a large homeless population. Does this $600 million cover things like Churches sheltering the homeless, pantries, and such? Or is it in addition to the the $600 million? Something is very rotten here.

You're off by almost an order of magnitude [1]. Even if we say the official estimates are off by a huge margin and there are actually 20,000 homeless in SF, that's $30K per person, on top of however many millions are given out via begging and other programs. It's insanity.

[1] https://sfgov.org/scorecards/safety-net/homeless-population

Re: San Francisco voters approve taxes on highly paid CEOs, big businesses

#555

Post by vharuck »

nogabebop23 wrote: post #532

"dismisses fears that the surcharge will drive companies out of the city, saying the tax is modest in comparison to the cost of moving a business." ...until it's not. Amazon has shown us there are lots of attractive jurisdictions ready to shower companies with tax incentives to relocate; SF feels like a city that's enjoyed the benefits of many factors not directly of their making and they could be in for a strict rec…

What I took away from the Amazon pageant was that companies choose locations mostly by access to natural or social resources (educated workers, in Amazon's case). Same as always. But big companies can humor more towns to gin up bidding wars.

Re: San Francisco voters approve taxes on highly paid CEOs, big businesses

#556

Post by lawrenceyan »

mrits wrote: post #397
rcpt wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Luckily a San Franciscan figured it all out over one hundred years ago so we don't have to wonder about this: > THE GREAT PROBLEM IS SOLVED. We are able to explain social phenomena that have appalled philanthropists and perplexed statesmen all over the civilized world. We have found the reason why wages constantly tend to a minimum, giving but a bare living, despite increase in productive power: > As productive power…

You can purchase a 5K sqft lot outside of Austin for $2,200 and we still have a growing homeless problem. I'd look more into providing mental health, relocation, and incentives to stay off heavy drugs.

> You can purchase a 5K sqft lot outside of Austin for $2,200

How many miles away from the city though?

Re: San Francisco voters approve taxes on highly paid CEOs, big businesses

#557

Post by digitaltrees »

vondur wrote: post #445
mrits wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can purchase a 5K sqft lot outside of Austin for $2,200 and we still have a growing homeless problem. I'd look more into providing mental health, relocation, and incentives to stay off heavy drugs.

SF has a $360 million dollar a year budget for addressing the homeless situation. I'm not sure what funding they may also get in addition from the County and State Level.

Maybe if other states could be blocked from buying one way bus tickets for their homeless citizens and instead be responsible that would help.

Re: San Francisco voters approve taxes on highly paid CEOs, big businesses

#558

Post by someonehere »

Some of these city measures are carefully created to funnel money into the general fund. Our Prop I says it’s for something, but the board of supervisor who’s pushing the idea admitted there’s no guarantee the funds will go to what it was put on the ballot for. The money from Prop I will go into the general fund. Why is this important? The city has a huge pension liability they’re not able to renegotiate and keep from obligations to keep paying it. The city’s budget for next year is somewhere near $13b. Yes billion. For a city of 800k, our budget is $13b.

Re: San Francisco voters approve taxes on highly paid CEOs, big businesses

#559

Post by lawrenceyan »

mrits wrote: post #458
csomar wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you build on that? Is there water, electricity, gas and cable?

Yes. If you want to drive 50 miles outside the city you can get 10 acres for $50k.

50 miles is really far. You can get the exact same prices in California if you're willing to drive 50 miles outside SF / Bay Area proper.

Re: San Francisco voters approve taxes on highly paid CEOs, big businesses

#560

Post by 0goel0 »

artaak wrote: post #549

And where exactly these taxes will go? From pockets of CEOs to pockets of ... municipal bureaucrats, whose median salary floats at a humble mark of 175K/year? https://www.city-journal.org/san-franciscos-municipal-budget

If you spent time reading the article instead of leaving lies, maybe you'd know:

> The CEO tax is expected to generate between $60 million to $140 million per year. Haney said he wants most of the money directed towards health services.

Post reply on HN