Blaming shelters and street sleeping, Donald Trump blasts California for homeless crisis

[Fanatical Meat]

That's not what I gathered from your last sentence, nor would anybody else, I suspect.

Good thing we clarified it, thank you for pointing it out.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

As has been pointed out, one cannot simply add the two percentages together to come up with 2/3.

It doesn't work that way.

So to the point does addiction fuel homelessness yes or no?
Does California have a more urgent homeless problem?
Is what California doing effective?

 

[feralkid]

So to the point does addiction fuel homelessness yes or no?
Does California have a more urgent homeless problem?
Is what California doing effective?

All are "Yes, to some degree".

There are many other factors to consider.

You won't find the answer on a bumper sticker.

 

[Jhhnn]

As has been pointed out, one cannot simply add the two percentages together to come up with 2/3.

It doesn't work that way.

Why not just add in the 73% who smoke and call it an even 137%


Finally, Miramar should be ashamed for assuming "abuse" and "addiction" are synonymous. They are most certainly not, and spreading this fud is not helping.

Oh, My! You mean people will use alcohol & drugs at the same time? Like a few gin & tonics to go with a snootful of blow? A miniature of cheap vodka to go with some cheap meth? Say it ain't so!

 

[Fanatical Meat]

All are "Yes, to some degree".

There are many other factors to consider.

You won't find the answer on a bumper sticker.

Then why are there homeless camps?
Is it normal for people to sleep on the street, should it be tolerated?
*Per the article there are drug and rehab programs to get into in CA but yet there are people on the street*

 

[1prophet]

What if homelessness is just a symptom of small gubmint low tax Capitalism run amok?

Then the rich liberals and democrats in the blue states that have most of this homeless problem need to spend some lobbying money getting taxes raised and zoning changed including in their own neighborhoods in order to fund and build the housing and treatment needed,

instead of virtue signaling and pointing the finger at republicans while enjoying all that trickle down the republican economy and union busting, anti worker, anti-environmental globalization has bestowed upon them.

Trump and the republicans have become more and more of a useful diversion for them along with the identity politics they love to push in order to keep eyes off their activities while they hide behind some sort of anti-trump, social justice, virtue signaling banner,

allowing rich liberals, especially the coastal ones, to thump their chest like some pharisee of old about their superiority to those flyover ,conservative brain defective, deploraples,

but when it comes down to fixing or pulling down the obstacles creating the disparities in this country by reaching in their pockets and giving up at least some of that NIMBY attitude of theirs, they act no different than the worst of the trickle down rich conservatives they love to point fingers at.

Wealthy San Franciscans Raising Money to Block Homeless Shelter is Latest Example of Rich Disintegrating Society

Wealthy residents of San Francisco’s South Beach are organizing to stop a homeless shelter in their affluent neighborhood.

www.mintpressnews.com

Wealthy San Franciscans Raising Money to Block Homeless Shelter is Latest Example of Rich Disintegrating Society

The irony of wealthy Silicon Valley employees trying to block a local homeless shelter, as CBS notes, is that homelessness is on the rise in the Bay Area in no small part owing to Silicon Valley itself.

How Amazon Helped Kill Seattle a Tax On Business

A levy on big companies to fund affordable housing awakened the ire of corporations.

www.theatlantic.com

Seattle is one of the most progressive cities in the country. It’s the place where the Fight for $15 movement first gained traction, where the city council last year tried to levy a tax on the city’s richest residents, and where local government passed one of the country’s first secure scheduling ordinances to give shift workers more notice of when they’d be working. And now, Seattle businesses have had enough.


Less than a month after the Seattle City Council unanimously passed a “head tax” ordinance that would have levied a $275 per employee tax on Seattle businesses making more than $20 million a year, the same council voted to repeal that head tax Tuesday, in a 7-2 vote.

Council members say they changed their minds in the face of a well-funded and vicious campaign that sought to put a referendum on the November ballot to repeal the head tax, a campaign that they say also sought to flush progressives from office in Seattle. They say big companies like Amazon have held the city hostage by refusing to engage in a discussion about new revenue streams to fund affordable housing, and that though they might have quashed this effort, they have put forward no solutions for the city’s problems. Business leaders, meanwhile, say they’re fed up with a constant stream of taxes that have done little to solve Seattle’s growing homelessness crisis. “It's a little bit the straw that broke the camel’s back,” Heather Redman, co-founder of Flying Fish Partners, a venture capital firm, and the chair of the Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce, told me, about the head tax.

 

[woolfe9998]

Then the rich liberals and democrats in the blue states that have most of this homeless problem need to spend some lobbying money getting taxes raised and zoning changed including in their own neighborhoods in order to fund and build the housing and treatment needed,

instead of virtue signaling and pointing the finger at republicans while enjoying all that trickle down the republican economy and union busting, anti worker, anti-environmental globalization has bestowed upon them.

Trump and the republicans have become more and more of a useful diversion for them along with the identity politics they love to push in order to keep eyes off their activities while they hide behind some sort of anti-trump, social justice, virtue signaling banner,

allowing rich liberals, especially the coastal ones, to thump their chest like some pharisee of old about their superiority to those flyover ,conservative brain defective, deploraples,

but when it comes down to fixing or pulling down the obstacles creating the disparities in this country by reaching in their pockets and giving up at least some of that NIMBY attitude of theirs, they act no different than the worst of the trickle down rich conservatives they love to point fingers at.

Wealthy San Franciscans Raising Money to Block Homeless Shelter is Latest Example of Rich Disintegrating Society

Wealthy residents of San Francisco’s South Beach are organizing to stop a homeless shelter in their affluent neighborhood.

www.mintpressnews.com

How Amazon Helped Kill Seattle a Tax On Business

A levy on big companies to fund affordable housing awakened the ire of corporations.

www.theatlantic.com

I'm a CA liberal myself, and you are unfortunately correct here. We have wealthy liberals here voting against new housing developments, including those with a portion designated as section 8 for the poor. Their votes are ostensibly based on environmental concerns but no amount of placating those concerns ever seems to change their minds. They're protecting their own property values by keeping the market tight. It's classic NIMBYism.

 

[fskimospy]

This is not rocket science. The thing California could most easily do to combat homelessness is to build more homes.

Amazingly enough this would cost zero taxpayer dollars as the desire to build homes there is already sky high. All that needs to be done is to have the government stop prohibiting new home construction.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Then the rich liberals and democrats in the blue states that have most of this homeless problem need to spend some lobbying money getting taxes raised and zoning changed including in their own neighborhoods in order to fund and build the housing and treatment needed,

instead of virtue signaling and pointing the finger at republicans while enjoying all that trickle down the republican economy and union busting, anti worker, anti-environmental globalization has bestowed upon them.

Trump and the republicans have become more and more of a useful diversion for them along with the identity politics they love to push in order to keep eyes off their activities while they hide behind some sort of anti-trump, social justice, virtue signaling banner,

allowing rich liberals, especially the coastal ones, to thump their chest like some pharisee of old about their superiority to those flyover ,conservative brain defective, deploraples,

but when it comes down to fixing or pulling down the obstacles creating the disparities in this country by reaching in their pockets and giving up at least some of that NIMBY attitude of theirs, they act no different than the worst of the trickle down rich conservatives they love to point fingers at.

Wealthy San Franciscans Raising Money to Block Homeless Shelter is Latest Example of Rich Disintegrating Society

Wealthy residents of San Francisco’s South Beach are organizing to stop a homeless shelter in their affluent neighborhood.

www.mintpressnews.com

How Amazon Helped Kill Seattle a Tax On Business

A levy on big companies to fund affordable housing awakened the ire of corporations.

www.theatlantic.com

I still think that stamp collecting is the way to go.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

So, uhh, when will the Job Creators ride to the rescue & shower the homeless with trickle down goodness? Right after they do the same for the Rust Belt & coal country? Maybe they just need bigger tax cuts...

You seem to be trying very hard to argue my point.

 

[Jhhnn]

You seem to be trying very hard to argue my point.

Your point being what, exactly?

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Your point being what, exactly?

That Trump doesn't know what he's doing and additional housing doesn't fix anything by itself. You really must work on your reading comprehension.

 

[Jhhnn]

That Trump doesn't know what he's doing and additional housing doesn't fix anything by itself. You really must work on your reading comprehension.

Thank you for that. I apparently didn't catch your earlier posts in this thread. My mistake.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

As has been pointed out, one cannot simply add the two percentages together to come up with 2/3.

It doesn't work that way.

Why not just add in the 73% who smoke and call it an even 137%

Miramar should be ashamed for assuming "abuse" and "addiction" are synonymous. They most certainly are not, and spreading this kind of fud is not helpful.

BTW the text is

“One study found that substance abuse played a major role in becoming homeless for two-thirds of homeless individuals”
I think in this context lumping abuse and addiction together is appropriate. They contributed to homelessness. We can disagree on that, I’m just saying they contributed per the study.

 

[K1052]

This is not rocket science. The thing California could most easily do to combat homelessness is to build more homes.

Amazingly enough this would cost zero taxpayer dollars as the desire to build homes there is already sky high. All that needs to be done is to have the government stop prohibiting new home construction.

The reverence for local control I hear from people who don't want to build anything in CA makes me think the zoning code was chiseled on the tablets Moses brought down from Mt. Saini. Instead the history really is a desire to separate industrial uses from residential then later racial reasons to keep non-whites penned up in certain areas, a use it still somewhat serves today.

Just bulk up zone and exempt most residential development from CEQA. The state is already moving in this direction fortunately.

 

[Greenman]

This is not rocket science. The thing California could most easily do to combat homelessness is to build more homes.

Amazingly enough this would cost zero taxpayer dollars as the desire to build homes there is already sky high. All that needs to be done is to have the government stop prohibiting new home construction.

That would increase the number of available homes, and wouldn't help homeless people at all. The cost of each improved lot is the basis that sets the market price of the house you're selling. You don't put one bedroom studios on lots that cost half a million each. Moving the other direction into high density has cost benefits, but only to a certain point as tighter building codes and infrastructure improvements consume a great deal of the savings.
If you have no or very low income, the only way you're living indoors in CA is if your housing is government subsidized. Each city or state has to decide how much of its budget it's willing to spend on those subsidies. The one certainty is that it will never be enough.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

What if homelessness is just a symptom of small gubmint low tax Capitalism run amok?

Then why is homelessness the biggest problem in highly governed big liberal cities?

Hell, Texas is below national average

Nine per 10,000 people in Texas are homeless, compared with 17 per 10,000 people nationwide, according to HUD. The same data also shows a slight increase in the number of people experiencing homelessness in Texas in the past three years.

Meanwhile... in liberal fantasy land.... with high taxes across the board.....

 

[K1052]

Then why is homelessness the biggest problem in highly governed big liberal cities?

Hell, Texas is below national average





Meanwhile... in liberal fantasy land.... with high taxes across the board.....

View attachment 14778

People aren't homeless because taxes are high relative to the rest of the US. People are homeless due to a lack of affordable options, uncoordinated services, and restrictive land use planning intent on keeping density down and the dirty poor out compounded by substance abuse issues or other problems. Homelessness in Texas is rising everywhere except Houston who implemented a radical plan to actually get the homeless into housing and provide targeted services. You can put people in shelters all day long but you're really just hiding the problem instead of solving it without permanent housing. Most of Texas will be where CA is now in another 10 or 15 years.


https://www.texastribune.org/2019/07/02/why-homelessness-going-down-houston-dallas/

 

[Jhhnn]

Is it not natural that in the places where Capitalism has the greatest success that there are also the greatest casualties? It's not exactly a beneficial force.

 

[K1052]

Moving the other direction into high density has cost benefits, but only to a certain point as tighter building codes and infrastructure improvements consume a great deal of the savings.

Seattle literally did this and rents have declined...

https://www.oregonlive.com/business...ords-compete-for-tenants-as-market-cools.html

Across King and Snohomish counties, apartment rents dropped 1.1 percent from the third to fourth quarter, the second-biggest quarterly drop this decade, behind only the 2.9 percent drop seen at this time last year. When factoring in concessions landlords are offering to lure tenants, like a free month’s rent, the actual amount renters paid dropped 1.4 percent in the past quarter, or $24 a month.

 

[woolfe9998]

Then why is homelessness the biggest problem in highly governed big liberal cities?

Hell, Texas is below national average





Meanwhile... in liberal fantasy land.... with high taxes across the board.....

View attachment 14778

View attachment 14779

I can't see what high income taxes has to do with it. I would imagine that the majority of people who go homeless had income below the threshold where they even have to pay income taxes.

Taxes do play a role in one regard. In CA we have prop 13, a conservative republican initiative of the late 70's. This keeps property taxes low and provides incentive for people not to sell their homes even up to death because the low tax base is transferred to your heirs. This keeps property values high. This and NIMBYism which prevents growth are the two main factors in CA.

 

[Jhhnn]

Seattle literally did this and rents have declined...

https://www.oregonlive.com/business...ords-compete-for-tenants-as-market-cools.html

Meh. Apartment building in Denver has been huge yet the homeless population has quadrupled in 4 years. Go figure.

 

[fskimospy]

That would increase the number of available homes, and wouldn't help homeless people at all. The cost of each improved lot is the basis that sets the market price of the house you're selling. You don't put one bedroom studios on lots that cost half a million each. Moving the other direction into high density has cost benefits, but only to a certain point as tighter building codes and infrastructure improvements consume a great deal of the savings.

Of course it would help homeless people as it would overall make housing cheaper. That directly helps homeless people.

NIMBY people such as yourself constantly make this argument that is at odds with demonstrable reality and with the basic laws of supply and demand. When land acquisition costs are the primary cost driver building more densely means lower overall housing costs. As I have always said to you at least just saying you don’t want denser housing is a logical position to hold. Declaring that building more housing won’t lower costs because reasons is not.

If you have no or very low income, the only way you're living indoors in CA is if your housing is government subsidized. Each city or state has to decide how much of its budget it's willing to spend on those subsidies. The one certainty is that it will never be enough.

More high cost housing means more tax dollars, which means more money for housing subsidies.

Like I said this isn’t rocket science and it’s not like the housing market is some magical unsolveable problem. People screwed it up by not building enough houses, they can un-screw it by building more housing. Not just a little more either, drastically more. The good news is that California has belatedly realized this and the NIMBYs are slowly but surely losing. Lots of upzoning is coming.

 

[woolfe9998]

Like I said this isn’t rocket science and it’s not like the housing market is some magical unsolveable problem. People screwed it up by not building enough houses, they can un-screw it by building more housing. Not just a little more either, drastically more. The good news is that California has belatedly realized this and the NIMBYs are slowly but surely losing. Lots of upzoning is coming.

Nope. Failed.

How California’s big plans to address housing affordability crashed

Just over two weeks ago, California lawmakers were planning to advance some of the most aggressive policies in the nation to combat rising housing costs.

www.latimes.com

Three bills on the floor were gutted when a bunch of NIMBY's, excuse me, "engaged homeowner activists from predominantly suburban communities," decided to show up.

ries of dramatic committee hearings and last-minute decisions in Sacramento, three major housing bills were blocked or whittled to a husk. Their demise came at the hands of engaged homeowner activists from predominantly suburban communities, real estate lobbies and after a lack of intervention from Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislative leadership to keep the bills alive.

 

[fskimospy]

Nope. Failed.

How California’s big plans to address housing affordability crashed

Just over two weeks ago, California lawmakers were planning to advance some of the most aggressive policies in the nation to combat rising housing costs.

www.latimes.com

Three bills on the floor were gutted when a bunch of NIMBY's, excuse me, "engaged homeowner activists from predominantly suburban communities," decided to show up.

Those bills are making a comeback.