Always taking that flying leap to land on your face….
…as if he was just waiting to rub it in your face, $4.7 billion for children’s mental health programs announced by Newsom today…with no new tax required thanks to the robust economy of California, 5th biggest in the world if we were a country, and near $100 billion state surplus despite all the services provided here…
….how’s your red state doing?

Not directly aimed at homelessness, but children with mental health issues are one of the most vulnerable subsets of homeless and are overrepresented in the homeless population and as victims, and these programs will definitely help lower those horrific statistics across the board.

https://www.kcra.com/article/watch-california-gov-newsom-announces-dollar47b-plan-to-address-kids-mental-health/40933658

😂

I don’t live in LA….

We do have a homeless guy living in the neighborhood, down by the river (but no van) for years now….he cleans the streets of trash, keeps the gutters clean, and watches for late night crime, so no, I have no problem having homeless on my street, just like I had no problem hosting a homeless friend in my home for 6 months before letting him park and live in his airstream in my back yard for almost 7 years until he adopted an aggressive dog. I also donate fresh produce to food banks for the homeless constantly. I’ve done way more than my fair share, friendo. How about you?

There’s a big difference between accepting those here anyway and making the best of the situation and actively inviting more. Even well below normal intelligence people understand that, but you seem to not.

Rich…on $35k a year for two….in California. Well, that’s as based in reality as everything you say, so congrats on consistency….consistent insanity.

California on the other hand has a near $100 billion surplus, so we could build MORE facilities for addicts, mentally challenged/ill, and those who just had bad luck or no opportunities….if not for nimby asshats like this city council.

Funny, you thought them totally insane for suggesting housing homeless in hotels (without the option to opt out), which was the carrot part of this plan, but you relish the criminalization of being homeless, the stick. Pretty chicken shit and cowardly to pick on those who can’t defend themselves.

There was a proposed low income housing project 1 block away from me I didn’t oppose, but it fell through because there are absolutely no services and not even public transport here.

Great so you have no problem having this near your local school or even on your street or front lawn?

You a better person that most.

Go post a sign Homeless -- my yard is available.

Why can't California build space for these people or facilities for those with drug addition/ mental illness . Just add another gas tax or such. California people are rich, like you. Do you fair share

Her final statement is unbelievably clueless…Fear is precisely why they created this legislation and the only reason why it has any support at all.
A more accurate statement would have been “we will not legislate based on reality or reason, and certainly not with compassion or empathy.”
Criminalizing homelessness, which for 98% of homeless is not a choice, is not just draconian, heartless, and insanely expensive, it also doesn’t address the issue one bit. After paying to remove and/or incarcerate them, they don’t disappear, they get out of jail or get pushed out of the neighboring communities and are still homeless.

Also, California prisons are insanely overcrowded….how exactly do they expect to jail every non compliant homeless person? By releasing the violent career criminals, murderers and rapists that are pretty much the only ones left in Ca prisons? Great plan.

There are few places in LA that aren’t excluded by this ordinance. Anyone that babysits children or any office building with any daycare offered by a resident becomes a “day care center”, and any home schooled child a “school”.
It reminds me of some local anti smoking ordinances that banned smoking almost everywhere in Davis except the center of a major intersection….which clearly wasn’t a good place for smoking breaks. I think it was struck down.

In 1933, the Nazi Party passed a Law "against Habitual and Dangerous Criminals", which allowed for the relocation of beggars, homeless, and the unemployed to concentration camps. Just saying.

I like how treating everyone like an actual human being makes people like bob call me a radical or a progressive or a leftist.

It says a lot about people like him.

---------------------------------

---------------------------------

I mean OBVIOUSLY everyone who is homeless wants to be and is in that position because of no one's fault but their own, so they should be shown no mercy, even if it means we wont let them even sleep in the street. /s

Posted 2 days after the ordinance failed to pass.

This follows the ending of “project roomkey” a federal (covid) program that assisted homeless with hotel rooms and more permanent housing, now defunded.
These voucher programs for hotel rooms are nothing new. Forcing businesses to accept them at 2pm for all empty rooms is, not letting them refuse to rent to undesirable (crazy, filthy, drunk/high, loud, with aggressive dogs, etc) tenants is new. Neither stood a chance of passing.

This was a political stunt, likely by the right, never intended to pass. It’s not hard to get enough signatures to get local ordinances on the ballot in Ca. Getting them passed is another thing altogether.

Another “L” bob. Not even worth a downvote, just sad this is what you cling to.

This is a very common right wing taking point. Amish and homeless people don’t get covid, because it’s all a lie.

So, Bobby, what is the 2020 Republican platform?
“Block Democrats from any progress”, absolutely nothing else.
There wa a proposal for a Republican Party platform….”1) raise taxes by $4500 on all low income people who today don’t pay taxes because they are below the poverty level and 2) end all social programs like Medicare, Medicare, social security, food assistance programs, etc. by “sun setting” any social program every 5 years and requiring the new legislature to start over from scratch (unless the right has control, then forget it).

“We cannot blame republicans (for rich people not paying taxes) when HOUSE democrats have the majority” 1) the tax breaks for the rich were enacted when Republicans held the house, senate, presidency, and a supermajority in the Supreme Court…a simple majority in the house and no where else after the fact does not give Democrats the ability to repeal a horrific law.

Then he wants to blame the California legislature for local groups fighting against low income housing in their neighborhood, for zoning and construction laws that severely limit where and how you can build. Such nonsense. The housing crisis in California is not limited to the homeless, there just aren’t enough houses to buy or rent. Pretending there are just no programs to secure housing, that the legislatures just don’t care and are ignoring the issue isn’t just ignorant, it’s outright dishonest. No surprise at all considering the source. California has a housing crisis, not simply an “ignoring the homeless “ problem. Property in California is so in demand that average workers are priced out of the market and fully employed people find themselves homeless. Red states have cheap property because successful professional people don’t want to live there, which leads to more affordable housing and fewer homeless. My property has quadrupled in value over 20 years, and I’m not in any town or city.

California just approved $12 BILLION to spend on our homeless issues. Red states pass laws essentially making homelessness a crime, so many homeless migrate to “blue states” where services exist and they aren’t put in jail for sleeping in public or loitering.

Texas just made it illegal for homeless people to camp in tents.

So, Bob, tell me about the Republican plans to house the homeless in red states. About all the services and assistance they want to provide but are blocked by democrats from moving forward. Show me the high end Republican neighborhoods inviting low income housing into their neighborhoods, keeping in mind that many, even in California, are right wing neighborhoods with Republican led local government that blocks construction.

You’ve tried this nonsense propaganda before, about 6 months ago when it was originally posted if I recall, I debunked it thoroughly then. So sad @bobknight33 can’t remember anything for over 3 seconds or he would recall the last time he posted this nonsense opinion piece and I rubbed his nose in it.

Downvote into oblivion this right wing projection,

Good until it’s not, then it’s disaster.
It’s not smart for anyone ever to put all their eggs in one basket. No matter how much they watch the basket. Shit happens, shit out of your control, and when it hits the fan, by the time you feel the spray it can be too late. Nothing is totally safe, you want to lose it all because Elon decided Dogecoin IS a good investment and puts every penny into it, then changes his mind? (Close to what happened, btw).
It’s also about diversification in successful companies so when one goes down you aren’t homeless. That is both safer and more profitable….short and long term.
All intelligent investing is about the long game, get rich quick schemes are just that, schemes, not stable investments.

If you learned from your lumps, why are you suggesting such poor investment advice? Where’s the NEXT Tesla, it already had it’s big boom. You don’t invest on the way down.


The issue is you are talking up Tesla two years too late. Pre 2020, you would have been totally correct, today not so much.

I have Apple….but not just Apple.

Precognition sounds great, but it’s always a craps game….and a crappy game.

No, because I don’t think I should get to do business in America for free while the destitute pay taxes. It’s immoral and unethical. Period.

As a state government, it’s my duty to see that everyone gets equal treatment. Most states refused to give Musk tax free status.
Much like saying you can rent a room in your poor parents house, or you can stay there for free and just watch them struggle to eat and keep the lights on while you save up for your third Ferrari. I say it’s immoral to not pay them rent, you say it’s dumb to not take advantage.

Tx tax for Musk is 0%. Like saying if you can pay for service or get it and not pay, wouldn’t you walk away from your bill?

Austin has become a total shit show since Musk showed up. They REALLY could have used those taxes for uncountable things, starting with massive homelessness to police to crumbled roads to electrical and water systems that don’t quit in the cold….

No, if I were Musk, I would not do the same. I like America and don’t see it as a piggy bank to rob, Musk not so much? He would jump to China if they paid him enough, and you would cheer.

The real bob stood up.

You aren’t for assistance for the homeless, you insist you should get the same handout, for the same period of time, despite having no need. You just erased the positive comment above I think someone else made using your account.

You know 1/2 or more would use it up early, then need assistance later.

The “strings” are things like prove you applied to at least one job per day AND do community service until you’re employed. Barriers to getting your shit together and, for many, barriers to applying.

Who gets to determine who qualifies as disabled?

Republicans ARE assholes and you have chronic dependence already in the form of tax breaks (to the point of zero taxes) for their businesses, massive corporate welfare outpacing personal welfare exponentially, use of public services despite not paying for them (roads, ports, police, etc).
If you use ANYTHING the government provides but don’t pay taxes (or minimal taxes equating to 5-10%) you are chronically dependent on government welfare. That describes every Republican business owner I’ve ever known, not one wanted to pay a dime to keep his nation healthy if they could possibly avoid it.

Your video, STUDY: $500 Per Month Life Changing For The Homeless, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I'm for this.
If homeless this kind of $ is enriching. It has real meaning.

I am against all the government strings that end up keeping one dependent of government.

Just hand out to those in need.

As for people on warfare there only need to be a set time limit of benefits. Helping is great making people dependent is wrong.

Did they offer that in the program, or was it only random individuals….or are you extrapolating, assuming the program became universal? I thought this plan was just for the indigent.

$500 each for 4 works out to more than my wife brought home for 40 hours a week after 15 years at her last job…..barely livable for 4 anywhere in California, a nice income in some states. Not a huge amount to provide for 6 months. How much does temporary housing, services, extra law enforcement, etc cost over that time for 4 people? I assume they’re close.

Yes, universal income is costly, but most on the right won’t consider giving the destitute money if they don’t get a handout too, that likely multiplies the amount by over 10 times. With a means test, it would be billions, maybe under $100 billion. We spent nearly $6 trillion on bad Covid response in 2020, including trillions to corporate welfare handouts with no strings attached and they still fired millions of workers. I think if that’s ok we can afford to invest in making people productive again instead of drains on society (of course, not everyone will benefit, but 75% success must be a win overall). If not, socialize any corporation that took a bailout, we bought em, we should own them.

…Or taking on more debt like every government project, but the increase in gdp from turning costs into profits likely pays for the program without a dime in new taxes, just a reduction in costs of handling the homeless and new taxes from their incomes….especially if you have a means test and not universal income.

Yes, they convoluted by calling it universal income but focusing on homeless. It should be UMI. Universal Minimum Income….under employed get less than unemployed up to a certain minimum livable combined income, fully employed (with living wages) get nothing….IMO. Sadly, a large portion of people can’t see what’s in that plan for them (no homeless, less crime dumbshits) so won’t consider it unless they also get $500 even though that’s not even a noticeable amount to them….one more ivory backscratcher.