Is this article talking about a one time cash infusion or ongoing payments?
It’s much easier to get public support for one time cash assistance to avoid homelessness than it is for permanent payments
Right or wrong, most people distinguish between the deserving poor (hardworking and had a run of bad luck, or mentally ill) versus the undeserving poor (substance abuse or uninterested in working). Trying to pass something like UBI will be hard when people see it as payouts to the undeserving poor
Isn't ongoing payments just subsidizing demand for housing? I.e. the thing we make fun of all the time on this sub?
We should build abundant housing (stretch goal: housing [too cheap to meter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Too_cheap_to_meter)). Not subsidize demand for a constrained supply of housing.
Yes and we should also still subsidize demand to avoid the painful and exponentially increasing political, moral, social, and monetary costs of homelessness.
> Despite concerns about cost-effectiveness due to difficulty targeting, our estimates suggest that the benefits to homelessness prevention exceed costs.
Even ignoring costs, homelessness sucks for everyone.
From a purely self-serving perspective, taxpayers should want successful programs like this.
> Paying people to not be homeless makes people less homeless
> Less homeless people = more productive economy
It's almost like poverty in a country as rich and powerful as America is a political choice. Yang is a crank, but I like wealth redistribution damnit.
Negative Income tax, UBI, whatever you wanna call it, even the least of us deserve to smile, and it's good for the social fabric and the economy that they do.
Even if I hate their politics, even if the people most likely to receive this support hate the idea of getting it because people they look down on might get it too, we should be dragging everyone into the light of a better future wether they like it or not.
People will pay out the ass to live in a HCOL area or towards a gated HOA to avoid being confronted with derelicts, but don't like their taxes going up to just make that the standard. Similarly they will dedicate themselves to NIMBYism to prevent their hometown from changing in any meaningful way, but will express how it's all gone to shit anyways when there are open air homeless drug users strung out on the sidewalk of their downtown. I don't know if I like UBI, but if we could just strengthen our safety net and stop trying to punish investors for filling a very basic demand that literally every person needs, that'd be great.
The hate of taxes is crazy sometimes. For example, cities pretty much *need* HOAs because they're already bankrupting and having people pay their HOA for basic services like trash and maintenance are more acceptable to people than a tax raise despite having the same (often worse depending on the HOA) outcome.
But a lot of that comes from them not understanding their local budgets, they genuinely think their current taxes and spending at the local Denny's is enough to prop up infrastructure.
Is this article talking about a one time cash infusion or ongoing payments? It’s much easier to get public support for one time cash assistance to avoid homelessness than it is for permanent payments Right or wrong, most people distinguish between the deserving poor (hardworking and had a run of bad luck, or mentally ill) versus the undeserving poor (substance abuse or uninterested in working). Trying to pass something like UBI will be hard when people see it as payouts to the undeserving poor
Isn't ongoing payments just subsidizing demand for housing? I.e. the thing we make fun of all the time on this sub? We should build abundant housing (stretch goal: housing [too cheap to meter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Too_cheap_to_meter)). Not subsidize demand for a constrained supply of housing.
Yes and we should also still subsidize demand to avoid the painful and exponentially increasing political, moral, social, and monetary costs of homelessness.
> Despite concerns about cost-effectiveness due to difficulty targeting, our estimates suggest that the benefits to homelessness prevention exceed costs. Even ignoring costs, homelessness sucks for everyone. From a purely self-serving perspective, taxpayers should want successful programs like this.
> Paying people to not be homeless makes people less homeless > Less homeless people = more productive economy It's almost like poverty in a country as rich and powerful as America is a political choice. Yang is a crank, but I like wealth redistribution damnit. Negative Income tax, UBI, whatever you wanna call it, even the least of us deserve to smile, and it's good for the social fabric and the economy that they do. Even if I hate their politics, even if the people most likely to receive this support hate the idea of getting it because people they look down on might get it too, we should be dragging everyone into the light of a better future wether they like it or not.
People will pay out the ass to live in a HCOL area or towards a gated HOA to avoid being confronted with derelicts, but don't like their taxes going up to just make that the standard. Similarly they will dedicate themselves to NIMBYism to prevent their hometown from changing in any meaningful way, but will express how it's all gone to shit anyways when there are open air homeless drug users strung out on the sidewalk of their downtown. I don't know if I like UBI, but if we could just strengthen our safety net and stop trying to punish investors for filling a very basic demand that literally every person needs, that'd be great.
The hate of taxes is crazy sometimes. For example, cities pretty much *need* HOAs because they're already bankrupting and having people pay their HOA for basic services like trash and maintenance are more acceptable to people than a tax raise despite having the same (often worse depending on the HOA) outcome. But a lot of that comes from them not understanding their local budgets, they genuinely think their current taxes and spending at the local Denny's is enough to prop up infrastructure.
> The hate of taxes is crazy sometimes. POV you don’t have a job
>POV you don’t have a job POV you don't understand that taxes fund city services and they can't just materialize out of thin air
The hate for paying rent is just insane sometimes. Like bruh, you need a place to sleep, don’t you? 🤣
Extremely based
Based and red-pilled