Topic: Seattle seeks to spend more money on homeless | |
---|---|
Edited by
alleoops
on
Tue 03/28/17 09:05 AM
|
|
Some balk as Seattle seeks to spend more money on homeless
SEATTLE — Sixteen months after he declared a state of emergency on homelessness, Seattle’s mayor is asking voters in this liberal, affluent city for $55 million a year in new taxes to fight the problem. But some are pushing back, saying the city already spends millions to combat homelessness, and things appear to have gotten worse, not better. In making his case, Mayor Ed Murray says the problem has grown exponentially and federal and state help is unlikely. He wants voters to support a proposed ballot initiative that would increase property taxes to raise $275 million over five years for homeless services — almost doubling what Seattle spends each year. Supporters say current resources haven’t been enough to stem the rising tide of people on the streets, and the proposed levy will provide more housing for those who need it most. “This is a city that’s not going to wait for a dysfunctional federal government to show up and do something – because lives are being lost,” Murray said at a recent news conference. The mayor, who is up for re-election, would be on the same ballot as the tax initiative if backers gather enough signatures to qualify it for the August election. City voters have approved three property tax increases in as many years to pay for affordable housing, preschools and buses, on top of other taxes, and some say the higher bills are pricing out working- and middle-class families. Others are demanding accountability. Barbara Poppe, a national housing expert hired by the city as a consultant, said programs to be funded by the initiative align with recommendations in her August report and that the city generally appears to be on track. Asked whether the city needed more resources, she said the number of homeless people has increased since data in her report. “You’re going to need more resources if you’re having people experience more homelessness,” she added. http://www.apnews.com/c441729b0f8a43be8c1335214a637481 |
|
|
|
We will see what the citizens of Seattle decide
I hope they will be willing to contribute, but I do not live there. |
|
|
|
Edited by
yellowrose10
on
Tue 03/28/17 11:06 AM
|
|
Some balk as Seattle seeks to spend more money on homeless SEATTLE — Sixteen months after he declared a state of emergency on homelessness, Seattle’s mayor is asking voters in this liberal, affluent city for $55 million a year in new taxes to fight the problem. But some are pushing back, saying the city already spends millions to combat homelessness, and things appear to have gotten worse, not better. In making his case, Mayor Ed Murray says the problem has grown exponentially and federal and state help is unlikely. He wants voters to support a proposed ballot initiative that would increase property taxes to raise $275 million over five years for homeless services — almost doubling what Seattle spends each year. Supporters say current resources haven’t been enough to stem the rising tide of people on the streets, and the proposed levy will provide more housing for those who need it most. “This is a city that’s not going to wait for a dysfunctional federal government to show up and do something – because lives are being lost,” Murray said at a recent news conference. The mayor, who is up for re-election, would be on the same ballot as the tax initiative if backers gather enough signatures to qualify it for the August election. City voters have approved three property tax increases in as many years to pay for affordable housing, preschools and buses, on top of other taxes, and some say the higher bills are pricing out working- and middle-class families. Others are demanding accountability. Barbara Poppe, a national housing expert hired by the city as a consultant, said programs to be funded by the initiative align with recommendations in her August report and that the city generally appears to be on track. Asked whether the city needed more resources, she said the number of homeless people has increased since data in her report. “You’re going to need more resources if you’re having people experience more homelessness,” she added. http://www.apnews.com/c441729b0f8a43be8c1335214a637481 I can see both sides of this. On one hand, I believe helping those that want it, especially vets. But I can see those in power, misuing the money and not doing what they should. Taxpayers don't want to throw hard earned money away |
|
|
|
Looks like liberal, sanctuary cities will have to come up with more taxes to pay for these things. I wonder how will work out when the federal dollars stop coming too.
Liberalism is great until you run out of other peoples money. or so they say.... |
|
|
|
and conservatism is great, until you run out of your own,,,
which more and more people are doing in THIS country |
|
|
|
Looks like liberal, sanctuary cities will have to come up with more taxes to pay for these things. I wonder how will work out when the federal dollars stop coming too. Liberalism is great until you run out of other peoples money. or so they say.... I think this is where the powers that be have mishandled things. Normal people are already struggling and can't be taxed more or they might be homeless too. |
|
|
|
and conservatism is great, until you run out of your own,,, which more and more people are doing in THIS country Yep, and that's even more reason to cut spending and cut taxes. |
|
|
|
I, for one, would help (do do) the homeless especailly vets but I, also, won't throw money away. I see homeless with signs a lot. I will but food instead of give money
|
|
|
|
Here, the panhandlers have their own shuttle buses.
|
|
|
|
Here, the panhandlers have their own shuttle buses. Aren't you in DFW like me? |
|
|
|
and conservatism is great, until you run out of your own,,, which more and more people are doing in THIS country Yep, and that's even more reason to cut spending and cut taxes. taxes are not whats causing people to run out of their money budgeting the tax money is the only real problem, but tax money is meant partly for 'general welfare' of Americans, if we stop looking after even the basic needs, we are no more than another 'third world' country spending generates income which keeps the economy flowing,,, let people just 'go without' long enough , and the economy flops too, because noone has anything left to contribute,,,, |
|
|
|
Here, the panhandlers have their own shuttle buses. Aren't you in DFW like me? yea, the "Metroplex". |
|
|
|
Here, the panhandlers have their own shuttle buses. Aren't you in DFW like me? yea, the "Metroplex". Wait....you are near me and we haven't had beers? |
|
|
|
and conservatism is great, until you run out of your own,,, which more and more people are doing in THIS country Yep, and that's even more reason to cut spending and cut taxes. taxes are not whats causing people to run out of their money budgeting the tax money is the only real problem, but tax money is meant partly for 'general welfare' of Americans, if we stop looking after even the basic needs, we are no more than another 'third world' country spending generates income which keeps the economy flowing,,, let people just 'go without' long enough , and the economy flops too, because noone has anything left to contribute,,,, Well said, comrade. |
|
|
|
Here, the panhandlers have their own shuttle buses. Aren't you in DFW like me? yea, the "Metroplex". Wait....you are near me and we haven't had beers? The last time I had beers that giant rooster chased me home. |
|
|
|
and conservatism is great, until you run out of your own,,, which more and more people are doing in THIS country Yep, and that's even more reason to cut spending and cut taxes. taxes are not whats causing people to run out of their money budgeting the tax money is the only real problem, but tax money is meant partly for 'general welfare' of Americans, if we stop looking after even the basic needs, we are no more than another 'third world' country spending generates income which keeps the economy flowing,,, let people just 'go without' long enough , and the economy flops too, because noone has anything left to contribute,,,, Well said, comrade. actually, a comrade would be living where government controlled production and employment,,,, I prefer Ami,, french like in Switzerland, where people pay taxes gladly for the 'general welfare' and they still maintain a debt to gdp ratio of under 40 percent spending done wisely and with budgeting |
|
|
|
Where I work is not a good part of the town and I see homeless most everyday. The ones in their 20's ask me for money all the time.. it is clear by looking at them ( and the scabs on their skin) that they are on crystal meth or crack. I don't give them a dime.
But there are a few older ones that I see all the time and they have never asked me for money, I give them some money when I can because I know they will actually use it for food or something else. They always just smile or say thank you. I don't give to charities much anymore because there are not many who spend a majority of the money on the actual cause.. some, but not many. Frankly I have lost faith in them, by their actions and their spending habits. I prefer to give right to the cause, if I can. |
|
|
|
and conservatism is great, until you run out of your own,,, which more and more people are doing in THIS country Yep, and that's even more reason to cut spending and cut taxes. taxes are not whats causing people to run out of their money budgeting the tax money is the only real problem, but tax money is meant partly for 'general welfare' of Americans, if we stop looking after even the basic needs, we are no more than another 'third world' country spending generates income which keeps the economy flowing,,, let people just 'go without' long enough , and the economy flops too, because noone has anything left to contribute,,,, Well said, comrade. actually, a comrade would be living where government controlled production and employment,,,, I prefer Ami,, french like in Switzerland, where people pay taxes gladly for the 'general welfare' and they still maintain a debt to gdp ratio of under 40 percent spending done wisely and with budgeting well, good for them, comrade Ami. |
|
|
|
I agree,, Mugabe
|
|
|
|
Mahatma Gandhi
|
|
|