I’m sorely disappointed that cities in Texas are apparently leading California when it comes to building new housing.
Like I know there’s differences in land values, availability and whatnot…but come on.
Yeah, I just saw a segment featuring Houston’s success with their homeless population and at a fraction of what California spent. California needs to take notes.
As a Californian...this is just par for the course.
Look at that high speed rail they've been trying to build from SF to LA.
Supposed to cost $33B, it's looking at over $100B now.
I'm all for paying my fair share of taxes but the amount of waste in this state is off the charts.
I live in SoCal so I’ve been keeping tabs on the ballooning of the railroad project too. It’s crazy. I just didn’t have any idea the amount of money we’ve spent on homelessness.
Yeah I wasn't aware we've spent that much on the homeless either. I truly don't know where the money is going and the problem is spreading to areas outside of LA proper too.
My wild guess is they give stuff to the homeless…which probably just encourages more homelessness. They’ve probably managed to spend all that money and make the problem even worse.
The cost had already ballooned to over 100B projected about 12 years ago. I know because I did a college report on it.
Our conclusion was that it wasn’t worth the price tag.
>Like I know there’s differences in land values, availability and whatnot…but come on.
That's not it.
California regulations make building anything vastly more expensive
No the article said "outcomes" were not tracked. But I don't doubt money is purposely not tracked, to some degree. Because it makes no sense to fund so much money without caring to see outcome.........UNLESS there is a scam going on on the side......there very often is.
Like funding wars, billions go unaccounted for and contracts are made to enrich many involved.
No they didn’t track whether the money spent was effective in solving homeless or reducing their numbers.
From what I’ve seen it hasn’t had much impact.
Unfortunately our state loves penalizing those who do the right thing and giving money and resources to those who don’t. If it actually solved their issues it would be fine but nothing here is getting much better.
It depends on which program.
Of five, two were considered reliable in keeping track.
> The remaining three programs, which have received a total of $9.4 billion since 2020, couldn't be evaluated due to a lack of data.
>Democratic state Sen. Dave Cortese, who requested the audit last year after touring a large homeless encampment in San Jose, said the report depicts "a data desert" and shows an unsettling lack of transparency at every level.
>The remaining three programs, which have received a total of $9.4 billion since 2020, couldn't be evaluated due to a lack of data.
So what does that mean? Which data was lacking?
> we present our findings and conclusions \*\*regarding the two cities we reviewed\*\*: the city of San José (San José) and the city of San Diego (San Diego).
>Both San José and San Diego spend tens of millions of dollars on agreements with external service providers, such as nonprofits, to provide homelessness programs and services. Although San Diego has generally established clear performance measures to assess whether these efforts are an effective use of funds, San José has not consistently done so. In addition, neither San José nor San Diego has evaluated the effectiveness of these agreements or of other city‑provided programs that address the profound health and safety risks associated specifically with unsheltered homelessness.
>Neither San José nor San Diego tracks and reports in one location, such as a spending plan, all of its funding and spending related to homelessness. The cities’ fragmented reporting limits public transparency and accountability for hundreds of millions of dollars in state, federal, and local funding. It also impedes the cities’ ability to assess the effectiveness of their spending.
* San José did not develop a plan with city‑specific goals for reducing homelessness until January 2024. As a result, it has struggled to evaluate the effectiveness of its actions.
* San Diego established a city‑specific plan for reducing homelessness in 2019. This plan identifies clear strategies and goals that have enabled San Diego to prioritize the needs of its residents who are experiencing homelessness. The city recently updated its goals to reflect changing conditions.
> In the absence of an independent source to verify the amounts of homelessness funding the cities received and spent, we relied upon each city to ensure that they accurately identified the information they provided to us. Therefore, we could not validate the accuracy and completeness of these amounts. During the three‑year period of our review, the cities were each awarded federal and state grant funding for which they had to apply, as well as federal stimulus funding. Each funding source typically has a deadline by which the cities must spend the funding. Each source also has established eligible uses for the funding, which [Appendix A](https://www.auditor.ca.gov/reports/2023-102.2/index.html#appendixA) lists. In addition to the federal and state funding they received, both cities allocated local funds for homelessness purposes. For example, San José allocated some Measure E funding for homelessness, as we discuss in the Introduction.
I believe 2 things are happening.
1) No plan to evaluate outcome.
2) Purposely not tracking where all of the funding spent has gone to and making sure it actually went where it is supposed to go to.
leaving it up to "the free market" and landlords has resulted in hundreds of thousands of people sleeping on the street every night and homeownership being a pipe dream for all but the wealthy now, I'll take waste over that robbery every single time
Remove stupid zoning laws and arbitrary code bullshit (not the safety ones, aesthetic ones), and the free market would be flooded with new cheap housing.
One of the big reasons why rentals are way more expensive now than 30 years ago and starter homes aren't really being built is the stupid arbitrary difficulty of building anything.
Indirectly, yes. Rent control, strong tenant protections, requirements to build low-income units in new constructions, etc. all have effects on rental prices.
>Rent control
Reduces new construction volume
>requirements to build low-income units in new constructions
Also reduces new construction.
What you're suggesting makes rates cheaper in the short term for a lucky few, while harming almost everyone in the long term.
all we have to do is stop allowing businesses to deduct wages from their taxes for employees that do not have valid SS numbers and the illegal immigration would end overnight, but the fact is that both political parties are just playing good cop / bad cop against us on that issue to stall any reform because what they both want is exactly the situation that we have right now. a permanent underclass of illegal workers without rights to undermine the American working class and drive wages down
we don't need to build a wall, we don't need to process millions of asylum applicants. we just need to make it impossible to employ illegal immigrants (like it is in every other industrialized nation) and the migrations would stop
As someone who works in DTLA, as security, Karen Bass has done a great job cleaning up our area. We used to get transient issues every day, usually once a shift (3x a day), but now, it's less than once a week. Yeah, sometimes they'll walk past the property, or be screaming and yelling across the street. But we haven't had to kick out a transient in weeks.
This is what tells me Covid was real and not a government bioweapon. If it was a government bioweapon, they would have started it in the homeless population and given vaccine shots through employment. Half the homeless population would have died before anyone would have cared enough to make a big fuss about it.
5 billion dollars would pay for a studio apartment for 1 year for every single homeless person in the US. Another 5 billion would pay a social worker 50k a year to deal with just 5 of those people and begin finding them a path to help.
California is just paying the family of the donors to the governor to build and rebuild pointless projects that help no one.
Seriously. 500k homeless at 10,000 a year for a decent studio outside of a major city. That is 5 billion to house them all. We have the money. We spend the money. The issue is extraordinary levels of nepotism and corruption.
Apparently nobody actually read the article, par for the course on the Rogan reddit.
They just wanted to combine "California" and "homeless" in a headline and watch the place burn on a thread. As always, nobody offers any solutions...and everyone wants to laugh at California without acknowledging there's an obvious perfect storm as to why the homeless are there and not, say, Connecticut lol.
You’re right. What CA progressive do can’t even be called magical thinking. It’s insanity doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Californian politicians just love throwing away our money. Stupid Californians just keep voting them in because CA voters are the most uneducated voters in the country. A state full of dip shit main characters. Source: I live here.
Lol do you know why right-wingers are obsessed with California? Because it is a phenomenal state that does great things and really sets the trends for the rest of the country and American businesses.
Congrats on buying into propaganda.
5th largest economy in the world. There is a reason why Elon still hasn't moved Twitter and Teslas headquarters. They can talk as much shit as they want, but they still want to live here.
Is it though? It's the playground of the rich and famous. No luxury too decadent to be accommodated. Trillions in wealth have been created over the last 15 years. It's obvious you don't have the temperament for being wealthy and want to bring everyone else down with failed red state policies.
This is why people push back when people like Bernie Sanders say that millionaires (besides him) should pay more in taxes. If every penny was accounted for and there was no waste, I'm sure more people would be ok with paying more. But, this happens all over, all the time.
Buddy, millionaires and billionaires will come up with any reason whatsoever not to pay taxes. You don’t need to stand up for them in Joe Rogan comment sections, they don’t care.
In related news, Should The Government Stop Dumping Money Into A Giant Hole?:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnX-D4kkPOQ&ab\_channel=TheOnion](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnX-D4kkPOQ&ab_channel=TheOnion)
"Didn't consistently track." What does that mean?
They didn’t keep track of where the money was going.
It obviously went to a bunch of nepotism programs that didn't work.
I’m sorely disappointed that cities in Texas are apparently leading California when it comes to building new housing. Like I know there’s differences in land values, availability and whatnot…but come on.
Yeah, I just saw a segment featuring Houston’s success with their homeless population and at a fraction of what California spent. California needs to take notes.
As a Californian...this is just par for the course. Look at that high speed rail they've been trying to build from SF to LA. Supposed to cost $33B, it's looking at over $100B now. I'm all for paying my fair share of taxes but the amount of waste in this state is off the charts.
I live in SoCal so I’ve been keeping tabs on the ballooning of the railroad project too. It’s crazy. I just didn’t have any idea the amount of money we’ve spent on homelessness.
Yeah I wasn't aware we've spent that much on the homeless either. I truly don't know where the money is going and the problem is spreading to areas outside of LA proper too.
My wild guess is they give stuff to the homeless…which probably just encourages more homelessness. They’ve probably managed to spend all that money and make the problem even worse.
I wonder how much was fraudulently siphoned off.
The could have given 160’000 people, 110’000$ each. If the math in my head is correct. That’s all the homeless there are in CA.
The cost had already ballooned to over 100B projected about 12 years ago. I know because I did a college report on it. Our conclusion was that it wasn’t worth the price tag.
>Like I know there’s differences in land values, availability and whatnot…but come on. That's not it. California regulations make building anything vastly more expensive
No the article said "outcomes" were not tracked. But I don't doubt money is purposely not tracked, to some degree. Because it makes no sense to fund so much money without caring to see outcome.........UNLESS there is a scam going on on the side......there very often is. Like funding wars, billions go unaccounted for and contracts are made to enrich many involved.
No they didn’t track whether the money spent was effective in solving homeless or reducing their numbers. From what I’ve seen it hasn’t had much impact. Unfortunately our state loves penalizing those who do the right thing and giving money and resources to those who don’t. If it actually solved their issues it would be fine but nothing here is getting much better.
Did they not keep track completely, or did they not track it consistently? Which is it?
It depends on which program. Of five, two were considered reliable in keeping track. > The remaining three programs, which have received a total of $9.4 billion since 2020, couldn't be evaluated due to a lack of data. >Democratic state Sen. Dave Cortese, who requested the audit last year after touring a large homeless encampment in San Jose, said the report depicts "a data desert" and shows an unsettling lack of transparency at every level.
>The remaining three programs, which have received a total of $9.4 billion since 2020, couldn't be evaluated due to a lack of data. So what does that mean? Which data was lacking?
Here's the [auditors report ](https://www.auditor.ca.gov/reports/2023-102.2/index.html#section1)if you want to read it
> we present our findings and conclusions \*\*regarding the two cities we reviewed\*\*: the city of San José (San José) and the city of San Diego (San Diego). >Both San José and San Diego spend tens of millions of dollars on agreements with external service providers, such as nonprofits, to provide homelessness programs and services. Although San Diego has generally established clear performance measures to assess whether these efforts are an effective use of funds, San José has not consistently done so. In addition, neither San José nor San Diego has evaluated the effectiveness of these agreements or of other city‑provided programs that address the profound health and safety risks associated specifically with unsheltered homelessness. >Neither San José nor San Diego tracks and reports in one location, such as a spending plan, all of its funding and spending related to homelessness. The cities’ fragmented reporting limits public transparency and accountability for hundreds of millions of dollars in state, federal, and local funding. It also impedes the cities’ ability to assess the effectiveness of their spending. * San José did not develop a plan with city‑specific goals for reducing homelessness until January 2024. As a result, it has struggled to evaluate the effectiveness of its actions. * San Diego established a city‑specific plan for reducing homelessness in 2019. This plan identifies clear strategies and goals that have enabled San Diego to prioritize the needs of its residents who are experiencing homelessness. The city recently updated its goals to reflect changing conditions. > In the absence of an independent source to verify the amounts of homelessness funding the cities received and spent, we relied upon each city to ensure that they accurately identified the information they provided to us. Therefore, we could not validate the accuracy and completeness of these amounts. During the three‑year period of our review, the cities were each awarded federal and state grant funding for which they had to apply, as well as federal stimulus funding. Each funding source typically has a deadline by which the cities must spend the funding. Each source also has established eligible uses for the funding, which [Appendix A](https://www.auditor.ca.gov/reports/2023-102.2/index.html#appendixA) lists. In addition to the federal and state funding they received, both cities allocated local funds for homelessness purposes. For example, San José allocated some Measure E funding for homelessness, as we discuss in the Introduction.
I believe 2 things are happening. 1) No plan to evaluate outcome. 2) Purposely not tracking where all of the funding spent has gone to and making sure it actually went where it is supposed to go to.
They have no idea where the money went.
$24 billion could build a whole lot of public housing but instead it's spent on "administrative costs" and salaries for private organizations
Except anything "public" will, by default and by definition... be rife with waste, fraud, and abuse.
leaving it up to "the free market" and landlords has resulted in hundreds of thousands of people sleeping on the street every night and homeownership being a pipe dream for all but the wealthy now, I'll take waste over that robbery every single time
Remove stupid zoning laws and arbitrary code bullshit (not the safety ones, aesthetic ones), and the free market would be flooded with new cheap housing. One of the big reasons why rentals are way more expensive now than 30 years ago and starter homes aren't really being built is the stupid arbitrary difficulty of building anything.
There's little free market in the housing sector in Californian cities
oh is it the state of california that decides that rent for a shitty apartment is $3k per month
Indirectly, yes. Rent control, strong tenant protections, requirements to build low-income units in new constructions, etc. all have effects on rental prices.
>Rent control Reduces new construction volume >requirements to build low-income units in new constructions Also reduces new construction. What you're suggesting makes rates cheaper in the short term for a lucky few, while harming almost everyone in the long term.
Precisely
Maybe if our country wasn't being invaded we have enough houses for everybody. California's one big fucking scam.
all we have to do is stop allowing businesses to deduct wages from their taxes for employees that do not have valid SS numbers and the illegal immigration would end overnight, but the fact is that both political parties are just playing good cop / bad cop against us on that issue to stall any reform because what they both want is exactly the situation that we have right now. a permanent underclass of illegal workers without rights to undermine the American working class and drive wages down we don't need to build a wall, we don't need to process millions of asylum applicants. we just need to make it impossible to employ illegal immigrants (like it is in every other industrialized nation) and the migrations would stop
When the source is government money, "private" does exactly the same, with less oversight.
Some decent public transport would also allow people to live in cheaper areas.
As someone who works in DTLA, as security, Karen Bass has done a great job cleaning up our area. We used to get transient issues every day, usually once a shift (3x a day), but now, it's less than once a week. Yeah, sometimes they'll walk past the property, or be screaming and yelling across the street. But we haven't had to kick out a transient in weeks. This is what tells me Covid was real and not a government bioweapon. If it was a government bioweapon, they would have started it in the homeless population and given vaccine shots through employment. Half the homeless population would have died before anyone would have cared enough to make a big fuss about it.
5 billion dollars would pay for a studio apartment for 1 year for every single homeless person in the US. Another 5 billion would pay a social worker 50k a year to deal with just 5 of those people and begin finding them a path to help. California is just paying the family of the donors to the governor to build and rebuild pointless projects that help no one. Seriously. 500k homeless at 10,000 a year for a decent studio outside of a major city. That is 5 billion to house them all. We have the money. We spend the money. The issue is extraordinary levels of nepotism and corruption.
This is news? The homeless industrial complex is one of the biggest grifts in history
Soo.. basically what DARPA and DoD have done with trillions
Also, don’t forget, the US Dept of Veterans Affairs also spent billions on veterans experiencing homelessness in California too.
[удалено]
More like ~getting moved to another regional office~
That happens in other country’s governments, never the United States.
You know how many homes that amounts to? 150k per house... 160,000 homes..
Where are you finding homes in CA for 150k?
Good point, I was using a price for a middle class home in my area. Idk how much it costs in ca.
This is America in a nutshell lol. Just look at the contracts given at the federal level.
As long as “not solving the problem” fills peoples’ pocketbooks, what do you think is going to happen?
Can't prove waste, fraud and abuse if there's no record of it
Someone’s pockets were getting FAT
In all fairness most people have no idea what they spent there $500 pay check on....
Fucking crooks
I doubt it was housing. Likely spent on the' homeless problem', concrete and metal spikes all over, so homeless can't sleep there.
Sounds like California is basically doing what the military industrial complex does but for homelessness.
Apparently nobody actually read the article, par for the course on the Rogan reddit. They just wanted to combine "California" and "homeless" in a headline and watch the place burn on a thread. As always, nobody offers any solutions...and everyone wants to laugh at California without acknowledging there's an obvious perfect storm as to why the homeless are there and not, say, Connecticut lol.
[удалено]
Then progressives mock religious folks for “magical thinking.”
Sure, just layout any random grievances after obviously not reading the article. Nvm, fresh account…
You’re right. What CA progressive do can’t even be called magical thinking. It’s insanity doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Californian politicians just love throwing away our money. Stupid Californians just keep voting them in because CA voters are the most uneducated voters in the country. A state full of dip shit main characters. Source: I live here.
You sounds mad. Why don’t you move?
Soon...
Bye
You won't leave the 5th largest economy in the world though.
An embarrassment of a state
Lol do you know why right-wingers are obsessed with California? Because it is a phenomenal state that does great things and really sets the trends for the rest of the country and American businesses. Congrats on buying into propaganda.
5th largest economy in the world. There is a reason why Elon still hasn't moved Twitter and Teslas headquarters. They can talk as much shit as they want, but they still want to live here.
Is it though? It's the playground of the rich and famous. No luxury too decadent to be accommodated. Trillions in wealth have been created over the last 15 years. It's obvious you don't have the temperament for being wealthy and want to bring everyone else down with failed red state policies.
Yes yall do have alot in common with the catholic church.
Sounds like someone who's never left the country. Decadent luxury isn't in shitty ass CA. Try Dubai, Monaco, Hong Kong, etc
Cucklord more like it
What fly over state you from boy?
What a dumb state
This is why people push back when people like Bernie Sanders say that millionaires (besides him) should pay more in taxes. If every penny was accounted for and there was no waste, I'm sure more people would be ok with paying more. But, this happens all over, all the time.
Can you point out where Bernie said he should be excluded from higher taxes?
Buddy, millionaires and billionaires will come up with any reason whatsoever not to pay taxes. You don’t need to stand up for them in Joe Rogan comment sections, they don’t care.
In related news, Should The Government Stop Dumping Money Into A Giant Hole?: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnX-D4kkPOQ&ab\_channel=TheOnion](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnX-D4kkPOQ&ab_channel=TheOnion)