California Senate proposes $2 Billion to address homelessness

[reddread]

http://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/editorials/article53164030.html

[reddread]

1. can you spot the bullshit attitude by the end of the article?

Fresno Bee editorial staff (BILL MCEWEN)
cant hide their own ugly.
"pointless protests"
yeah Ive got one for you buddy.

this is how Jerry Brown and the Bee want pointless protests handled

http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/crime/article52756620.html

[GummyBearz]

2. The narrative got lost at this point:

The narrative got lost at this point:

The Legislature would take 7 percent of the Proposition 63 money, about $130 million, to finance $2 billion in revenue bonds to build housing for severely mentally ill homeless people.

The $2 billion would provide 10,000 to 14,000 housing units, as much as $200,000 per unit.


Come up with a more efficient way to spend that money. Aside from the bad idea of using the tax money to just sell bonds (which then have to be paid back by city tax payers), there is also the fact my friend just bought a giant 4 bedroom brand new house in a good neighborhood in a 300,000+ population city in California for that exact same price.

Politicians are very interesting when it comes to money...

edit: I should have used a better word in the first place

[reddread]

3. they love that $tuff

I pointed out the other day the absolute expense of spending 11 million on 69 single person units.
the same day I saw an article about two big apt complexes selling to a socal developer for 11.7
several hundred residents could be housed in family style accomodations.
but homeless arent regular people...

[onecaliberal]

4. The Fresno bee is a right wing rag.

[GummyBearz]

5. Its well known... what are you getting at?

Does that mean this proposal does not exist?

[onecaliberal]

7. Really? Yeah that's what I'm saying the proposal doesn't exist. Do you always

speak for others, or pretend they said something they didn't?

[GummyBearz]

10. I asked what you were getting at

The OP isn't about the Fresnobee, so what are you getting at by bringing it up?

[reddread]

11. I brought it up in the first reply

dont think that poster went off on a tangent, it is quite relevant to the hidden meaning of the editorial.

[reddread]

6. +1000

not so long ago it was a very decent paper.

[onecaliberal]

8. Sad what it's come to.

[reddread]

9. they can justify 200k per single occupancy unit and 2 Billion to help 10% of the population

so, it would cost 20 billion dollars for the State of California to provide housing for the homeless population.
I assume they are taking the most chemically unbalanced demographic to be their primary goal, and the rest can
find bootstraps?
there are political donors seeing huge returns on their investments while helping to solve the problem of homelessness,
their Golden Goose.