Seattle Socialists Strangle Golden Goose

[Kath]

Amazon should apologize to Seattle for creating so many good paying jobs and exit the state. That'll fix everything!

[jediuser598]

There comes a time when the facts are before us, and we just disagree on fundamental issues, without either side being factually incorrect.

I believe if that junky shows up at the ER, or hospital, suffering from self-inflicted injuries, whether it be HIV or other diseases or injuries, she should still be treated. AFAIK you guys are against that.

Ok, you're entitled to your opinion. You're entitled to vote. We just fundamentally disagree. Is what it is.

[DBTrek]

Anyone showing up in the emergency room is guaranteed care, as any illegal immigrant could tell you. The fact that you believe the rest of the community should be on the hook for additional care beyond that, like every time some junkie injects themselves by shooting up with a dirty needle, simply highlights your feelings of entitlement to spend other people’s money on your pet causes.

[C-Mag]

On an up note in Washington State. Evergreen College SJWs just got a free lesson in the Free Market.

Plummeting enrollment prompts $6M budget cut at Evergreen State
https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=10910

[Okeefenokee]

There comes a time when the facts are before us, and we just disagree on fundamental issues, without either side being factually incorrect.

I believe if that junky shows up at the ER, or hospital, suffering from self-inflicted injuries, whether it be HIV or other diseases or injuries, she should still be treated. AFAIK you guys are against that.

Ok, you're entitled to your opinion. You're entitled to vote. We just fundamentally disagree. Is what it is.

Sad.

[nmoore63]

On an up note in Washington State. Evergreen College SJWs just got a free lesson in the Free Market.

Plummeting enrollment prompts $6M budget cut at Evergreen State
https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=10910

It is an injustice that that indoctrination center is a state university.

[JohnDonne]

DBTrek, why you abusing my boy jedi? Why you mad?

You keep screaming in shrill tones about the money, the billion dollars supposedly unaccounted for. Such hysterical pitch borders on the hilarious. All you have to do is read an article or two.

There are supposedly about 12000 homeless people in Seattle.

One bedroom housing prices go up 56 percent every five years.

According to a study by Zillow, for every 5 percent rent increase about 256 people in Seattle become homeless.

That's means around 2800 Seattle residents became homeless to help create that 12000 people in five years. That's like 30 a percent increase for Seattle citizens alone. (Man, no wonder folks there are upset at the tech companies.)

That doesn't even account for the people coming in from other areas.

Now, you might argue, "Oh, it's Seattle's fault for trying to take care of their own, now other people are coming in." But if Seattle didn't take care of their own, they would simply burden everyone else with their problem. That's irresponsible. Yet imagine if other cities took care of their people? Then the homeless burden would be spread around. As it stands, Seattle is picking up these other area's slack.

Now, about the billion dollars.

It would cost $192 million per year to house and care for all the people experiencing homelessness in King County, based on what nonprofit Plymouth Housing Group says it costs to shelter and care for people at its facilities. Not all people experiencing homelessness require the level of services Plymouth provides, so that number could be much lower.

That does not include the cost of development in pricey Seattle, though, where building one affordable apartment costs $300,000. Building 12,000 units would cost $3.6 billion, nearly as much as Amazon.com spent developing its Seattle headquarters.

But why should I do all your homework for you? Just read the article. They even have a nice infograph.

https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/new ... costs.html

Now, keep in mind those twelve thousand units would serve low income residents for many years after they're built.

What does that do for the poor right now? Well at the moment Seattle has 16000 affordable housing units, so they've created over half the housing units they ultimately need. I guess it's one of those long-term solutions you hear about. Not as compelling as the solution to drive the poor people into the cold, but it's a real solution with benefits to the people it's trying to help.

There’s already 12,400 income and rent-restricted affordable housing units that are funded by the city of Seattle, and there’s just over 3,800 similar units in the Multifamily Tax Exemption Program, according to a spokesperson for the Seattle Office of Housing.

The head tax spending plan only aims to create or maintain roughly 900 more units over five years at a cost of $155 million or $174,000 per unit.

https://www.king5.com/article/news/loca ... -552435613

Another interesting tidbit.

That tax system is frequently referred to as the most regressive in the country because Washington’s constitution prohibits an income tax. By extension, Seattle ends up as the most regressive big city in the U.S. Simply put, the poor pay a much higher percentage of their income in taxes than the rich. And with voters already fed up with hikes in sales and property taxes, local government is left with few tools in the toolbox to raise more revenue.

https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/05/ ... ax/560411/

So, in Seattle the poor are already paying a higher portion of their income than the rich, and yet we're supposed to think this tax is some Socialist asset seizing uprising rather than a modest solution to a problem that affects everyone in the city.

But don't let that dampen your foaming at the mouth outrage.

[Okeefenokee]

Outlaw homelessness. Bring back poor houses.

[DBTrek]

JD - what a random smattering of carefully selected paragraphs, non-cited sources (where is the Zillow study?), and irrelevant data you’ve produced. Kudos. A veritable smorgasbord of Side-topic distractions that have nothing to do with our City Council squandering a billion dollars to solve nothing.

The only shrillness appearing in this thread comes directly from the two guys who can’t admit that $17000 in tax funding for every man, woman, and child in Seattle is an obnoxious amount of money to tackle a 10k (or 12k using your unsupported number) homeless “crisis”. To take that kind of money and only achieve attracting MORE homeless to the city is an unmitigated failure.

Failure to everyone Except to our two resident malthusians, of course. You two get to bask in a double helping of human suffering as the taxpayers cough up life-degrading amounts of money to “solve” homelessness, and the homeless continue to expand their numbers and die on the street. Ha-ha-ha. You sure stuck it to all of us.

Yet even this has not whet your appetite for human suffering, as you’re both back to cheer the suspension of job growth in the city, so our council can fund less than 5% of their “solution” at the cost of alienating our major employers. Hilarious. You guys are a regular pair of vultures, cackling and snapping your beaks in anticipation over just how deeply you can screw everyone else to advanced your failed ideology.

Real heroes.

[Okeefenokee]

Let them sell themselves into slavery. Proceeds go to help the needy.