I mean San Francisco has a $1.1B budget for homelessness. That's a contribution of almost $1,300 for every man, woman and child resident of SF. And yet the problem is worse, not better.
Maybe it's not a money problem but the approach that's the issue.
They do not. I agree they are useless on purpose. That is my point.
In reality, anyway, the social, economic and political system works pretty well for business and capital owners. Specially those at the very top. Governments are corrupt because the system is corrupt. The rules of society have been written, and this dates back to the foundation of the country, to benefit elites.
In order to change the rules major dissent is needed, and that will only come in a situation of complete collapse of the political system. I think it will happen, and I actually think things are getting really heated up... but it's not gonna be pretty.
It will be interesting to see what kind of economic, political and social models could be followed. But really, elites will never want to risk their current positions.
In addition to that, you need to constantly evolve your delivery vehicles to overcome newly developed defense capabilities.
In even the most bare-bones defense scenario, the needed investment is fairly large, and it depends on how large of an investment adversaries make.
Our best and brightest are making money to buy fallout shelters in NZ or wherever.
If you are a property owner, then distributing the externalities and barbaric social harm of the insane NIMBYism and zoning laws that artificially protect your property's valuation to the majority renting population makes sense. A few thousand a year is nothing compared to real estate.
And obviously, that amount of money is easily enough to just give the unhoused the housing they need, if it weren't impossible to build affordable housing in the first place.
In fy2021-2022 the amount is $670M … over two years.
SF spends 1/4 of the amount you accuse it of.
Furthermore, it’s well known that other counties near and far send their homeless people here. So as a SF tax payer… I think you owe me many thanks for taking care of your homeless people.
> The FY21-23 HSH budget leverages $1.2 billion over the next two years in federal, state, and local resources (including Prop C funds). In addition to HSH’s existing commitments
Actually, a pediatric emergency was just declared [0]. And both Republicans and Democrats passed a $250 Million bill to provide rapid support for children's mental health. A Dr friend described it as "if I'm seeing a child and I'm concerned he/she is suffering from depression, I can be on the phone with one of the top 5 experts in the country in 30 minutes".
I'm aware, "mental health" for kids isn't the same as "education for kids" - but this is a big step in the right direction
[0]https://www.aacap.org/AACAP/zLatest_News/Pediatricians_CAPs_...
That seems like a less than scalable approach.
Sounds unreasonably optimistic.
About $2 per person under age 18.
What do you suggest? More funding? The US has one of the most expensive public education systems per capita. We keep pouring more money into it and it keeps getting worse. I'm in favor of "providing additional support to schools" but it needs to be something other than throwing money at the problem.
What is an event or piece of legislation that has been passed?
Politically, outside of the obvious 2020 election, there has been unbridled and unprecedented government spending since at least the beginning of the pandemic. Whether it was justified is up for debate, we likely still haven't realized all of the effects, but it has been at levels typically only those further on the left would propose.
Forgive me if I'm not really that concerned about Qanon shaman taking selfies in the capital building or the FBI creating fake white supremacist groups.
One small anecdote to avoid citing :), a biography of a US congressman said that in the 1950s Democratic and Republican Senators would sometimes vacation together at each other’s summer homes or during the annual recess. Not sure that happens anymore.
Ill leave the judgement to you, but it’s pretty obvious that things are not the same today as they were 3 years ago.
Let's see, who was the party in charge then, hmm...
What do you think is going to happen if we stop maintaining our infrastructure?
> Everyone but the most wealthy will live like dogs
These two points confict. Maybe the left should stop trying to raise the SALT tax deductions that the right reduced?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/nov/22/democr...
And I say this as someone that would benefit from raising the SALT taxes. It is wrong for them to try to raise it
I'd really want to see the data on which you base this belief. Watching US politics from Europe I see the Democrats roughly matching the European center. European "left" has no voice in the US!
"They say things very far left( arguable ), but the way they govern is extremely moderate."
The politicians? They aren't confused. They understand the system.
In order to have political success they explicitly seek the backing of the wealthy elite.
It constrains the politics to never be leftist, and politicians to dodge policy and posture on culture wars.
Hell, Anything? No. Nothing is ever done. Nothing ever happens except decay.
The United States is spinning down its governmental duties. The pendulum will swing right again, and that will be the death blow. They will continue to gut public and infrastructure programs. All 3 branches will finally truly be a jobs program for the upper class to suck the blood out of everyone else.
The roads will fall apart. Jails will continue to fill up. The homeless crisis will continue to not fix itself. Everyone but the most wealthy will live like dogs, and then obligingly die when they can't afford the "good" insurance.