I hate the homeless - Page 26

**Reclaimedwg** · December 28th, 2018, 10:41 PM

San Francisco spent about $70,000 a year on each homeless person and they are still homeless - they rather keep the $ and stay on the streets than get a place they can call their own.

Furthermore, $70,000 is not enough $ to cover the cost of a decent apartment and related living expenses (utilities, food, owning a car and car insurance, DOES NOT INCLUDE health care and insurance) in San Francisco.

The average price of a decent apartment in San Francisco is $3,400 a month and the average living expenses for a single person is $3,600 a month.

You pay at least $20 a day to park in most areas of San Francisco.

Plus California has a state income tax starting at 10.3% so a part of your paycheck goes to not just social security and federal income tax like most folks in the other 49 States, it also goes to the State of California.

San Francisco has the highest cost of living than any other cities in the USA, even New York City.

It's 62% higher than the national average.

**diamelsx** · December 28th, 2018, 11:19 PM

Hey I say raise property tax rates especially on all secondary properties owned. also don't see where the drug issue should come into play I know just as many addicts that own homes as that are homeless. Being an addict only seems to be a problem when you are poor.

ShutUpLutz! · December 28th, 2018, 11:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diamelsx

Hey I say raise property tax rates especially on all secondary properties owned. also don't see where the drug issue should come into play I know just as many addicts that own homes as that are homeless. Being an addict only seems to be a problem when you are poor.

Well, if you are middle/upper class/rich, you most likely aren't going to have to panhandle on the street for drug money or break into peoples homes and steal jewelry/electronics/ break into construction sites and steal copper wiring or mug people and you probably have some money and maybe even insurance to pay for rehab.

ShutUpLutz! · December 28th, 2018, 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wildtig2013

San Francisco spent about $70,000 a year on each homeless person and they are still homeless - they rather keep the $ and stay on the streets than get a place they can call their own.

Furthermore, $70,000 is not enough $ to cover the cost of a decent apartment and related living expenses (utilities, food, owning a car and car insurance, DOES NOT INCLUDE health care and insurance) in San Francisco.

The average price of a decent apartment in San Francisco is $3,400 a month and the average living expenses for a single person is $3,600 a month.

You pay at least $20 a day to park in most areas of San Francisco.

Plus California has a state income tax starting at 10.3% so a part of your paycheck goes to not just social security and federal income tax like most folks in the other 49 States, it also goes to the State of California.

San Francisco has the highest cost of living than any other cities in the USA, even New York City.

It's 62% higher than the national average.

Where exactly does that $70,000 go? I know for a fact that no one wanders around handing out $70,000 in cash which your post implies. It goes into various programs which of course require people, at least some of whom are getting paid, and at least some of those programs require real estate, which means either renting or buying property and paying taxes on it, then there are office and other supplies for the various programs, so is it really $70,000 per homeless person?

I doubt it.

**Reclaimedwg** · December 29th, 2018, 12:37 AM

Some of that $275 million San Francisco spent on it's homeless population of about 7,500 is spent on housing them and providing them with health care and food and those folks then leave and go back to being homeless whenever they get tired of being taken care of.

It's the same principle as people who are in drug rehabs programs, whether a program paid by the county or city as part of their court ordered sentence or a program paid by themselves out of their own money, they don't complete the program and go back to the streets to get high.

Some of that $275 million is also spent paying 5 San Francisco city employees $184,000 a year, $71,760 in salary and $112,918 in benefits, to go around the city every day and pick up human poop.

**Reclaimedwg** · December 29th, 2018, 01:52 AM

San Francisco also spent $45 million a year picking up trash (street waste management), most of it left by the homeless population and it also includes when they need to clear out homeless people's tents cities or relocate them to other part of the city.

**bowlinggreen** · December 29th, 2018, 04:37 PM

To those who live in big cities, what percentage of the homeless, in your opinion, could be rehabilitated if magically given decent clothes and an apartment and a job?

Is it worth some sort of triage program to save those who could be saved, if you spent lavishly on some carefully considered individuals?

bcorgan · December 29th, 2018, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wildtig2013

San Francisco also spent $45 million a year picking up trash (street waste management), most of it left by the homeless population and it also includes when they need to clear out homeless people's tents cities or relocate them to other part of the city.

It'll be interesting to see what Prop C does, if anything, to the homeless population there...

**Reclaimedwg** · December 29th, 2018, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

To those who live in big cities, what percentage of the homeless, in your opinion, could be rehabilitated if magically given decent clothes and an apartment and a job?

Many of them don't want to work a job. They just want hand outs.

I have seen news reports of homeless folks that have been homeless for 10-20 years.

Also many of them have issues: mental or addiction to drugs and alcohol or both.

They don't want to be helped.

**SanteeFats** · December 29th, 2018, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diamelsx

Hey I say raise property tax rates especially on all secondary properties owned. also don't see where the drug issue should come into play I know just as many addicts that own homes as that are homeless. Being an addict only seems to be a problem when you are poor.

Now that is the solution the politicians use Diam. Pass a bond and put it on the property taxes, pass some measure that needs funding? hell property owners will gladly have it put on their taxes, etc. I am personally sick of it. Yes I do won property but my thought islet every one pay by raising the area sales tax. When people who have rentals and these measures get passed, usually IMO because those without real property think it cost them, where does the tax increase really go???? Ha Ha Ha in raised rents.

December 28th, 2018, 11:19 PM	#252
diamelsx Vintage Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Around the way Posts: 2,680 Thanks: 28,302 Thanked 29,499 Times in 2,673 Posts	Hey I say raise property tax rates especially on all secondary properties owned. also don't see where the drug issue should come into play I know just as many addicts that own homes as that are homeless. Being an addict only seems to be a problem when you are poor. __________________ No one has more fairweather friends than the truth...

December 29th, 2018, 04:37 PM	#257
bowlinggreen Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 4,192 Thanks: 48,676 Thanked 49,167 Times in 4,188 Posts	To those who live in big cities, what percentage of the homeless, in your opinion, could be rehabilitated if magically given decent clothes and an apartment and a job? Is it worth some sort of triage program to save those who could be saved, if you spent lavishly on some carefully considered individuals? __________________ So much porn, so little time...

December 28th, 2018, 10:41 PM	#251
Reclaimedwg Vintage Member Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 3,414 Thanks: 7,709 Thanked 26,946 Times in 3,089 Posts	San Francisco spent about $70,000 a year on each homeless person and they are still homeless - they rather keep the $ and stay on the streets than get a place they can call their own. Furthermore, $70,000 is not enough $ to cover the cost of a decent apartment and related living expenses (utilities, food, owning a car and car insurance, DOES NOT INCLUDE health care and insurance) in San Francisco. The average price of a decent apartment in San Francisco is $3,400 a month and the average living expenses for a single person is $3,600 a month. You pay at least $20 a day to park in most areas of San Francisco. Plus California has a state income tax starting at 10.3% so a part of your paycheck goes to not just social security and federal income tax like most folks in the other 49 States, it also goes to the State of California. San Francisco has the highest cost of living than any other cities in the USA, even New York City. It's 62% higher than the national average.

December 29th, 2018, 12:37 AM	#255
Reclaimedwg Vintage Member Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 3,414 Thanks: 7,709 Thanked 26,946 Times in 3,089 Posts	Some of that $275 million San Francisco spent on it's homeless population of about 7,500 is spent on housing them and providing them with health care and food and those folks then leave and go back to being homeless whenever they get tired of being taken care of. It's the same principle as people who are in drug rehabs programs, whether a program paid by the county or city as part of their court ordered sentence or a program paid by themselves out of their own money, they don't complete the program and go back to the streets to get high. Some of that $275 million is also spent paying 5 San Francisco city employees $184,000 a year, $71,760 in salary and $112,918 in benefits, to go around the city every day and pick up human poop.

December 29th, 2018, 01:52 AM	#256
Reclaimedwg Vintage Member Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 3,414 Thanks: 7,709 Thanked 26,946 Times in 3,089 Posts	San Francisco also spent $45 million a year picking up trash (street waste management), most of it left by the homeless population and it also includes when they need to clear out homeless people's tents cities or relocate them to other part of the city.