I used to love traveling to San Francisco. But, as the homeless has skyrocketed with gentrification - it’s so hard to see people living on the street next to the richest companies in America. Tech should live up to the values we SAY we have and PAY to address this cruelty.
-
Show this thread
-
2/ Because when I walk past a tech company I do a lot of business with, and LITERALLY walk past dozens of people without homes, I makes me want to stop doing business with that company. We have caused so much suffering in a city that used to be a beacon for our values.
8 replies 15 retweets 170 likesShow this thread -
3/ How much would it cost to really address the homelessness problem? 50 million a year? 100 million? That is a rounding error for our industry. If San Fran introduced a municipal bond fund to permanently fund programs for the homeless, our field could invest in it.
24 replies 29 retweets 182 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @BriannaWu
We just literally passed this last November but the funds are not being distributed pending the outcome of litigation determining whether a simple or super majority of voter approval is sufficient to pass said revenue measure. It will take 24-36 mos to sort out.
1 reply 1 retweet 8 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @BriannaWu
Kim-Mai Cutler Retweeted Kim-Mai Cutler
Also you can pass all the tax revenue measures you want, but if you can’t fix exclusionary zoning practices, you won’t be able to build said supportive housing or shelter beds anywhere in the city.https://twitter.com/kimmaicutler/status/1105730405720711168?s=21 …
Kim-Mai Cutler added,
Kim-Mai CutlerVerified account @kimmaicutlerYou can always count on SF to approve one of the largest business taxes in recent memory to address homelessness and then not be able to spend it because no one actually wants services or beds in their backyard. https://twitter.com/DominicFracassa/status/1105691943051321345 …Show this thread1 reply 2 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @BriannaWu
Also, we’re spending $280M this budget year and Prop. C would add another $300M a year, so no, LOL, it’s not a $50M or $100M/year problem.https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/29-million-increase-for-San-Francisco-12902707.php …
1 reply 3 retweets 9 likes
And no, that previous comment was not to make fun of SF’s budget because it is a legitimately large problem and half that money is spent on 6,000 supportive housing units that would house people who would otherwise be homeless, thereby doubling our existing population.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.