@kimmaicutler This is what SF used to do, before diverting funds to shelters. Would you recommend SF goes back to old plan?
-
-
Replying to @bryankitch @Noahpinion
also this study says the cash was targeted to people on the verge of homelessness, not indefinite cash payments.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @Noahpinion
so presented as a means to prevent homelessness from occurring to begin with, then?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bryankitch @Noahpinion
yes, it's *way* cheaper to prevent an eviction than to try and re-house someone.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @Noahpinion
Not sure I understand Noah's original tweet, then. There are already homeless people so too late?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bryankitch @Noahpinion
like Salt Lake City effectively ended homelessness with "Housing First" but their land costs are cheaper.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @Noahpinion
Ah, so this all ties back to the argument that city should have done more to control land value, then?
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bryankitch @Noahpinion
tried to stall the flow of capital into land with things like Prop. M in 1986, but this has perverse side effects
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler
I guess it seems like with land in such limited supply, the kind of real estate prices we're seeing are difficult to avoid
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @bryankitch @kimmaicutler
At the heart of the debate seems to be the extent to which these things can be controlled, realistically—is that fair to say?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
capitalism can't really be controlled. It can only be channeled. How we decide to channel it is subjective as a society.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.