HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


 

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Nov 10, 2018, 8:23 PM
mhays mhays is online now
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,749
Who said anything about paying people? This is spending on programs, not checks to bums.

I agree that there will be a lot of unintended consequences, and also the huge issue of public behavior isn't addressed. And it's certainly going to discourage headquarters for the city. I didn't want Seattle to have a similar measure. But there's some good stuff too...maybe fewer bums on the streets (while also drawing more bums to the city...-2+1?).

We could do much cheaper housing, and sometimes do. Tiny dorm-like rooms should be more prevalent for single homeless. But in the mean time I vote enthusiastically yes for Seattle's low-income housing levies...something like $30m per year if I recall.

Funding this stuff on the local level makes the burden fairly large. It should be on the state or national level...as the "they'll move here" claimants say, sometimes the core cities are doing everyone else's work for them.

I have a real mix of thoughts on this, including a dose of contempt for people who could work but don't...
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
 

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:55 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.