 |
| Angelika/Mike Schilli |
|
Michael Visitors from Germany are regularly shocked by the number of homeless people hanging around in San Francisco. It has become normal for them to set up tents right in the middle of the sidewalk, forcing regular pedestrians to walk on the street. And the police don't even come anymore when someone randomly smashes car windows to rummage inside for something of value; this has become as much a part of the cityscape as the Cable Car. Recently, we saw someone in the middle of the city selling a whole stack of vacuum-sealed meat from the supermarket out of his coat.
San Francisco spends $305 million annually on an estimated number of 7,500 homeless people. Now, Left-liberal voices aren't getting tired of emphasizing that one should by no means do the math and determine the alarming expenditure of more than $40,000 per homeless person per year, but rather take into account that the city also uses the money to pay the rent for people who would otherwise slip into homelessness.
In my opinion, the problem is that those responsible do not have to account for the fact that the problem gets worse every year. Why do they present higher homelessness numbers each year despite annual expenditures in the hundreds of millions? There is simply a lack of uncovering misconduct and holding people accountable, both the failures in the city administration and the homeless who, despite offered help, continue to make their living through burglaries.
The topic is, of course, endlessly discussed, and last year someone came up with the hot idea of throwing even more money at the problem—maybe it will get better! However, there was nothing in the city coffers, but in recent years, wealthy internet companies like Salesforce and Twitter have settled in the downtown area, and they are swimming in money! As always in such cases of financial shortage, San Francisco lets the citizens decide, and their voting behavior is 100% predictable when it comes to taking money from wealthy people or companies, as long as it doesn't cost them anything personally.
Badda-bing-badda-boom, on November 6 (along with the Midterm elections) in San Francisco, there was a vote on Prop C, and about 60% of the voters voted 'Yes'. From now on, companies with over 50 million in annual revenue must contribute between 0.175% and 0.69% to the homelessness fund, and large companies with over 1 billion in revenue must donate 1.5% of their payroll costs. If you're thinking 'Taxing revenue is madness, why not tax profit?', I completely agree with you.
This is, however, not yet the end of the story, because as soon as the vote was over, prompt reactions followed. legal concerns regarding Prop C surfaced. According to California's constitution, tax increases decided by a public vote require a two-thirds majority. Consequently, a tax association promptly filed a lawsuit with the California Supreme Court, and now the matter is on hold. The companies do have to pay the levy, which is supposed to funnel a total of 250 to 300 million dollars into the homelessness fund, but the city is not allowed to spend any of it until the matter is legally resolved. I wouldn't hold my breath for that long.
|
|
|
|
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
All Editions:
2023 148 149 150 151 152
2022 143 144 145 146 147
2021 138 139 140 141 142
2020 133 134 135 136 137
2019 129 130 131 132
2018 125 126 127 128
2017 120 121 122 123 124
2016 115 116 117 118 119
2015 111 112 113 114
2014 106 107 108 109 110
2013 101 102 103 104 105
2012 96 97 98 99 100
2011 91 92 93 94 95
2010 85 86 87 88 89 90
2009 79 80 81 82 83 84
2008 73 74 75 76 77 78
2007 66 67 68 69 70 71 72
2006 59 60 61 62 63 64 65
2005 54 55 56 57 58
2004 49 50 51 52 53
2003 43 44 45 46 47 48
2002 36 37 38 39 40 41 42
2001 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
2000 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
1999 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
1998 7 8 9 10 11 12
1997 1 2 3 4 5 6
1996 0