What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

California will soon be the world's 5th largest economy. (1 Viewer)

jonessed said:
Yes.  The problem is that once someone becomes homeless the odds of them forgoing medications, turning to drugs, developing mental illness,  etc. skyrockets.  Then you have the kids that now are forced to grow up in that environment.  I think many like to pretend there is nothing that could have been done, but that’s complete BS on its face.  If someone really believes that 50%+ increases in rents, mortgages, etc. aren’t putting families into the streets they deserve a swift kick in the head and a dunce cap.

Edit:  This isn’t meant to be directed at you.  This idea that these people were/are a lost cause permeates the Bay Area.  Sure, people are willing to fight for homeless rights and pay for shelters, but very few are willing to make the sacrifices to actually prevent homelessness.  It’s a crass, inhumane attitude.  These people live in conditions that make immigration detainment centers look like the Ritz.
Click to expand...
How you keep housing affordable is a more complicated than building more apartments though so I wouldn't put it solely on NIMBY folks. DTLA was probably one of the cheapest places to rent in LA, no? Skid Row has been there for the last 2 decades that I have been going to LA.

I'm sure there are a lot of issues compounding this problem and many things can been done but it also has to come down to a simple numbers game at some point. As population grows you are going to have a certain percentage of the population that is going to have problems that lead them to be homeless.

It is very frustrating, sad, and pretty scary to be honest that in this great economy that so many people are left behind. Doesn't bode too well.

 
The General said:
How you keep housing affordable is a more complicated than building more apartments though so I wouldn't put it solely on NIMBY folks. DTLA was probably one of the cheapest places to rent in LA, no? Skid Row has been there for the last 2 decades that I have been going to LA.

I'm sure there are a lot of issues compounding this problem and many things can been done but it also has to come down to a simple numbers game at some point. As population grows you are going to have a certain percentage of the population that is going to have problems that lead them to be homeless.

It is very frustrating, sad, and pretty scary to be honest that in this great economy that so many people are left behind. Doesn't bode too well.
Click to expand...
LA homelessness is up 16% so far this year, while overall population growth is less than 1%.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The General said:
This is all attributed to no desire to put affordable housing in LA? 
Click to expand...
Certainly not all.  I was just pointing out that it’s not directly related to population growth.  California is way behind on building adequate housing.  The recent cost of living explosion has just magnified the problem.

It’s also unfair to put the blame all on the big cities (SF, LA, Oakland, SD, etc.). The suburbs and surrounding cities are largely kicking the problem inward.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jonessed said:
Certainly not all.  I was just pointing out that it’s not directly related to population growth.  California is way behind on building adequate housing.  The recent cost of living explosion has just magnified the problem.

It’s also unfair to put the blame all on the big cities (SF, LA, Oakland, SD, etc.). The suburbs and surrounding cities are largely kicking the problem inward.
Click to expand...
Yeah. My point with that was just that homelessness is always going to be an issue, numbers will only continue to go up. Drug addicted and mental issues are bigger issues than just having affordable housing. But yeah they aren’t building large amounts of affordable housing in Brentwood any time soon.

Definitely exploding recently as you pointed out and as I have seen in the areas I have been. Really shocking how fast skid row expanded. Maybe people got pushed from somewhere else I’m not sure.

Being an outsider it’s the biggest problem I see by far in LA (and SF). Don’t see how it won’t be addressed better than it is now. It’s got to reach a tipping point soon.

 
The General said:
Yeah. My point with that was just that homelessness is always going to be an issue, numbers will only continue to go up. Drug addicted and mental issues are bigger issues than just having affordable housing. But yeah they aren’t building large amounts of affordable housing in Brentwood any time soon.

Definitely exploding recently as you pointed out and as I have seen in the areas I have been. Really shocking how fast skid row expanded. Maybe people got pushed from somewhere else I’m not sure.

Being an outsider it’s the biggest problem I see by far in LA (and SF). Don’t see how it won’t be addressed better than it is now. It’s got to reach a tipping point soon.
Click to expand...
I guess my main point was pointing out the hypocrisy of throwing money at supporting homeless people in their homelessness, but not making the more personal sacrifices required to help prevent it.

 
jonessed said:
I guess my main point was pointing out the hypocrisy of throwing money at supporting homeless people in their homelessness, but not making the more personal sacrifices required to help prevent it.
Click to expand...
I don’t see this being a problem that would be isolated to California and that’s more of a human nature thing. 

I would hesitate to call majority of people hypocritical also as hundreds of millions have been spent trying to address the issue. 

 
Good posting in here. I think you guys both identified parts of the issue. I'm critical of California because I see a model that doesnt make a lot of sense to an outsider. I've been to Cali multiple times, but never for an extended stay.

I read about the housing prices, the homeless problem, and the poverty issues. So I question why California politicians are so open to bringing in more undocumented immigrants and spending more resources on their welfare.  

California is already spending over 500 million a year to address the homeless issues but the numbers aren't showing much of a result. We can all agree that there has to be a tipping point and the state is trending the wrong way at the moment.  What changes? Offering to take in more people doesnt seem like a good idea to me. 

We can call it doing the right or moral thing to take in everyone in need, but at some point the needs may outnumber the resources. 

 
The General said:
I don’t see this being a problem that would be isolated to California and that’s more of a human nature thing. 

I would hesitate to call majority of people hypocritical also as hundreds of millions have been spent trying to address the issue. 
Click to expand...
Sure.  Greed is human.  I think California couches itself with language that leads themselves and others to believe they are more humanitarian in this regard though.  I find it largely self-serving.

I wouldn’t.  I think it’s obvious.  The state has recently had to go so far as to strip cities from being able to zone out apartments near mass transit.  That’s a pretty drastic step.

I don’t mind the disagreement though.  I appreciate the conversation.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jonessed said:
Sure.  Greed is human.  I think California couches itself with jargon that leads themselves and others to believe they are more humanitarian in this regard though.  I find it largely self-serving.

I wouldn’t.  I think it’s obvious.  The state has recently had to go so far as to strip cities from being able to zone out apartments near mass transit.  That’s a pretty drastic step.

I don’t mind the disagreement though.  I appreciate the conversation.
Click to expand...
I'm not from Cali so not really in a good spot to defend what they may or may not be doing. I do travel a lot around the US, mostly big cities and get to deal with different folks from all over. I'll say I disagree with your point about the state being humanitarian posers (my words not yours :lol:  ). Overall my perception is they are progressive and forward thinking across the board. The skyrocketing housing costs is really tricky issue to deal with it. Don't see how this is addressed without government addressing it.

The bolded in particular is something I'd be interested in reading about. Without knowing a thing about it that sounds like some greedy ### builders rather than the people of California not wanting to help fix the problem.

Thanks for the discussion.

 
Max Power said:
Good posting in here. I think you guys both identified parts of the issue. I'm critical of California because I see a model that doesnt make a lot of sense to an outsider. I've been to Cali multiple times, but never for an extended stay.

I read about the housing prices, the homeless problem, and the poverty issues. So I question why California politicians are so open to bringing in more undocumented immigrants and spending more resources on their welfare.  

California is already spending over 500 million a year to address the homeless issues but the numbers aren't showing much of a result. We can all agree that there has to be a tipping point and the state is trending the wrong way at the moment.  What changes? Offering to take in more people doesnt seem like a good idea to me. 

We can call it doing the right or moral thing to take in everyone in need, but at some point the needs may outnumber the resources. 
Click to expand...
Not really sure on the stats on illegal immigrants impacting homelessness. It definitely uses resources though, no way around that. Illegal immigration has been declining for years though.

An issue for sure but it being the most important issue seems more like a politics thing to me :cough: Trump :cough:

Another thing there is no perfect solution for. 

 
The General said:
I'm not from Cali so not really in a good spot to defend what they may or may not be doing. I do travel a lot around the US, mostly big cities and get to deal with different folks from all over. I'll say I disagree with your point about the state being humanitarian posers (my words not yours :lol:  ). Overall my perception is they are progressive and forward thinking across the board. The skyrocketing housing costs is really tricky issue to deal with it. Don't see how this is addressed without government addressing it.

The bolded in particular is something I'd be interested in reading about. Without knowing a thing about it that sounds like some greedy ### builders rather than the people of California not wanting to help fix the problem.

Thanks for the discussion.
Click to expand...
https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-housing-southern-california-rejects-state-20190618-story.html

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/07/01/newsom-talked-big-on-housing-how-has-he-stacked-up-so-far/

Apparently the bill was killed in May.  I didn’t realize that.

 
@jonessed I normally find myself disagreeing with you on political issues but I think that you make some great points on this one, and you obviously know what you’re talking about. 

Anecdotally, I’ve spoken to a few developers about affordable housing and I’ve been told that even with government subsidies it doesn’t pencil out. But that may change. Huntington Beach just lost a major lawsuit because they do not offer enough affordable housing. The lawsuit is currently on appeal but if it’s not overturned then HB will have to increase its level of subsidies to make it profitable for developers to build more affordable housing (typically apartment complexes.) Right now there is no motivation whatsoever. A new 2 bedroom apartment in HB is going for $3,000 a month. Affordable housing prices are around $400-500, and they have greater crime. So it’s a real dilemma. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jonessed said:
https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-housing-southern-california-rejects-state-20190618-story.html

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/07/01/newsom-talked-big-on-housing-how-has-he-stacked-up-so-far/

Apparently the bill was killed in May.  I didn’t realize that.
Click to expand...
I’d never heard about it. Thanks for the links.  

Hypothetically I could tell a story about how a certain school district has kept apartment complexes out of its boundaries for 40 years by collaborating/conspiring with developers...hell, even bullying them a bit. 

 
OrtonToOlsen said:
I’d never heard about it. Thanks for the links.  

Hypothetically I could tell a story about how a certain school district has kept apartment complexes out of its boundaries for 40 years by collaborating/conspiring with developers...hell, even bullying them a bit. 
Click to expand...
This is not an unusual story. 

 
jonessed said:
https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-housing-southern-california-rejects-state-20190618-story.html

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/07/01/newsom-talked-big-on-housing-how-has-he-stacked-up-so-far/

Apparently the bill was killed in May.  I didn’t realize that.
Click to expand...
After reading those it seems like CA has the same problems trying to get things done that any state has (Seattle area has the same issues trying to solve transportation, everyone community has their agenda and for 40 years they didn't do anything). Really hard to get areas to agree on how to fix issues. Some good points were made in one of those articles that you can't just drop a 15 story apartment in an area with no plans for parking. Cali does seem to love permits, building restrictions. Easy to pick on those as needless red tape bureaucracy, but I find that most are usually well intended if you look back through why they actually put into the books. 

Not everyone gets to live in Santa Monica, Palo Alto, etc. Has to be some areas though where they can put some stuff in though.

 
timschochet said:
Huntington Beach just lost a major lawsuit because they do not offer enough affordable housing
Click to expand...
How can a city be sued for this? On what legal grounds?

 
The General said:
Link

@jonessed 

Right inline with what we were discussing.
Click to expand...


I'm late to this argument but I'm quite familiar with the affordable housing crisis in Austin (and similarly, throughout the US). that article about Seattle could have been written about Austin. Here, neighborhood groups are the biggest obstacles to solving this crisis. 

Austin has virtually no duplexes or fourplexes or townhomes. Instead there are a bunch of local neighborhood groups that insist on single family housing with large yards right downtown. Its absurd.

 
whoknew said:
I'm late to this argument but I'm quite familiar with the affordable housing crisis in Austin (and similarly, throughout the US). that article about Seattle could have been written about Austin. Here, neighborhood groups are the biggest obstacles to solving this crisis. 

Austin has virtually no duplexes or fourplexes or townhomes. Instead there are a bunch of local neighborhood groups that insist on single family housing with large yards right downtown. Its absurd.
Click to expand...
It seems this is an issue pretty much in any city where people want to live. I can see the arguments on both sides kind of goes without saying that it's going to be polarizing issue. Ultimately people, regardless of how they see this problem getting fixed, have to agree that it's not in anyones best interest to have an explosion in homeless people and to have housing be completely out of reach for working people. 

Ultimately It's got to be addressed by government, zoning, programs. Huge oversimplification coming here but if you don't want solutions being forced upon you in your little enclave then you have to be paying more into some fund. There has to be away to make some type of formula that can quantify this. 

 
California has become the first state to offer taxpayer-funded health benefits to young adults living in the country illegally.

Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a bill into law on Tuesday that makes low-income adults age 25 and younger eligible for the state's Medicaid program regardless of their immigration status.

State officials expect the plan to cover about 90,000 people and cost taxpayers $98 million. California already covers children ages 18 and younger regardless of immigration status.

The law will not give health insurance benefits to everyone 25 and younger, but only those whose income is low enough to qualify.

Newsom and Democratic legislative leaders say they plan to further expand coverage to more adults in the years to come.

Advocates of the measure say it's a way to improve the health of immigrants in the state by providing them with access to the medical care they need.

Many immigrants who are in the country illegally are already enrolled for some government-funded programs, but they only cover emergencies and pregnancies.

Democrats had pushed to expand the coverage to even more adults, but Newsom rejected the proposals, saying it would cost about $3.4 billion to provide coverage to all California adults living in the country illegally. But he has vowed to keep expanding coverage in future years.

 
Not sure this is really the right thread for discussing this, but I don't really follow the logic of providing more taxpayer-funded benefits to illegal immigrants.

If we allow them to vote and provide more and more taxpayer-funded benefits, what is their motivation to ever become citizens? And what difference does it make, i.e., what is the benefit to them of becoming citizens? Meanwhile, does it not prevent the Federal and state governments from collecting taxes from those individuals?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This whole open borders, all immigrants welcome thing has got to end.  Immigration is great, but there has to be a process and reasonable guidelines.

 
rockaction said:
Shortsighted. 
Click to expand...
I don’t think so. This issue was discussed at length over 20 years ago when Prop 187 was debated. By giving undocumented immigrants basic health access we are preventing public health concerns and saving money in the long term. It makes good sense. 

 
timschochet said:
I don’t think so. This issue was discussed at length over 20 years ago when Prop 187 was debated. By giving undocumented immigrants basic health access we are preventing public health concerns and saving money in the long term. It makes good sense. 
Click to expand...
What public health issues have occurred in the last 20 years as a result of illegal immigrants not having healthcare?

 
jonessed said:
They have tried residential development in the past.  The problem is getting it through the cities and environmental laws.  Just owning the land isn’t enough.
Click to expand...
Google has tried this or just anyone building in general? Isn't making it profitable for the developer a major issue?

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
New York Times: "Will Asian Americans Bolt From The Democratic Party?" (6/20/22 23:20 PST)
Replies
36
Views
879
jon_mx
J
GordonGekko
Newsweek: "Democrats Have Forgotten The Working Class. It Will Cost Them" (7/14/22 14:39 PST)
Replies
19
Views
926
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
[icon]
"Anatomy of the Deep State" - Unsettling look at American Poli
Replies
1
Views
794
Slapdash
S

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top