Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yeah because 1 state should solve a nationwide problem.
No, but surely they could make a dent in their own homeless problem.
Comparing California's homeless issue with the rest of the country's is laughable. What they deal with out there is on a whole other level.
No worries. It's bound to be spent on projects and programs that nobody wants. I'd like to see a couple institutions in unused areas of the state be opened to house the homeless with drug problems and mental issues and with that much dough it's doable. They could be well staffed if you turn it into a jobs program for health and psych graduates.
No, but surely they could make a dent in their own homeless problem.
Comparing California's homeless issue with the rest of the country's is laughable. What they deal with out there is on a whole other level.
Heres the problem, people have been trying different solutions, but they keep trying to find either the cheapest, or the most feel good solutions. No one wants to get real.
We need to make section-8 available for people again. We need to help people get indoors. Paying their rent is LITERALLY cheaper then the cost of services caused by having them live on the streets. And trying to make California solve a problem thats increasingly everywhere is just being partisan.
WRONG! If Oklahoma City waited around for a private company to build its new Scissortail Park or Tulsa waited around for a private company to build its iconic Gathering Place Park, both cities would still be waiting. If a private company built either park, it would demand a fee to gain entrance.
A private company built a park in Anaheim, CA and wants $150 for an entrance ticket. The crowds in the park are enormous.
It's a bit like getting to April 15th and realizing you're going to get a big tax refund. Great news at first blush, but when you consider that you effectively:
a) given an interest free loan
b) lowered your own spending power
c) reduced your opportunity income
then it doesn't sound so good. Great for folks who have no fiscal discipline, terrible for everyone else.
The saddest thing of course, as exemplified by the OP, is that the notion that this surplus magically appeared is a thing to cheer and laud the state govt vs treat with healthy skepticism at best, and if you really want to be outraged, connect the dots and realize what this 'surplus' really says about the state govt.
This is just another lame attempt to stick up for a blue state and trash red states.
Newsom has no excuse for not doing anything about the homeless.
Given the Nimby's in Califor-Nimby-a, even if he allocated millions for housing for the homeless, you'll still have the Nimby's saying: Not In My BackYard! The coastal cities of Southern CA, a no-brainer, would never allow housing for the homeless in their cities.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
