4 ms·

I somewhat disagree here. Have you seen the homeless problem in SF, or the massive drug problem? Look, my point is that just because people have differing view

I somewhat disagree here. Have you seen the homeless problem in SF, or the massive drug problem? Look, my point is that just because people have differing views on life doesn't mean that they aren't equally capable of being correct. > Conservative states are more likely to disadvantage the poor, disabled and minorities. I would argue that is not necessarily the case. I have seen WAY more homeless, poor, disabled, and generally disadvantaged in California (and heroin users) than any other state. Perhaps they are just more visible, but the breakdown of the stats seem to agree with me[1]. Generally, conservative states just deal with things differently than liberal states, they both end up with their own issues. Disclosure: Personally I a libertarian at heart. I believe in the whole "socially liberal, fiscally conservative" thing, basically meaning I fall more in line with the "middle" than just about anyone. I find the bay area equally as appalling as most conservative regions, I think the only thing I find more appalling about conservative places are the whole anti-abortion thing. Honestly, racism and sexism is probably worse in the bay area than most places because everyone is trying to be so "equal" they end up being racist and sexist against the other parties. This leads to ridiculous conflicts that make no sense. [1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/22/america-drug-use-maps_n_5974592.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/22/america-drug-use-ma...

klipt 10y ago
> I have seen WAY more homeless, poor, disabled, and generally disadvantaged in California (and heroin users) than any other state. Perhaps they are just more visible, but the breakdown of the stats seem to agree with me[1]. Generally, conservative states just deal with things differently than liberal states For example, if other states' way of dealing with homeless people was "buy them a bus ticket to California", wouldn't that have exactly the outcome you are describing? http://www.mintpressnews.com/500-homeless-mental-patients-were-given-bus-pass-california-by-nevada-government-program/210607/ http://www.mintpressnews.com/500-homeless-mental-patients-we... The problem with one state treating the homeless well is that it simply attracts more homeless from other states, overloading the system. Homelessness really needs to be addressed on a federal level.
- ocdtrekkie 10y ago
  But if you actually follow the news in the Bay Area, you'd know tech companies growing and raising the cost and demand for housing is a large part of why you can't walk through San Francisco without tripping over a homeless guy. People are being driven from their apartments to make room for higher paying tech employees.
  - Decade 10y ago
    And if you actually looked into the issues, you’d know that tech companies don’t like it that costs are so high. Most of them are trying to become profitable before they run out of runway. Tech companies grow and raise the demand: True. Tech companies increase the cost: False. Most of the cost increases have been NIMBYs and misguided community organizers and environmentalists. For example, a major source of funding against homes near the T light rail line has been a retired insurance industry executive and consultant. That’s not tech. If there are not enough houses near the jobs, then somebody is going to be driven out. If you had to choose for your own property, then it would be irrational not to pick the higher paying tech employee.
  - r00fus 10y ago
    Don't blame Tech for what FIRE [1] is mainly responsible for. Ownership^W Rentership society and all that - it's here. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIRE_economy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIRE_economy
enraged_camel 10y ago
>>I would argue that is not necessarily the case. I have seen WAY more homeless, poor, disabled, and generally disadvantaged in California (and heroin users) than any other state. That's because California has nice weather year-around, which makes homelessness a lot more tolerable. (Same with Hawaii: lots of homeless people hanging out at beaches and lying on the the grass in parks.)

klipt 10y ago

> I have seen WAY more homeless, poor, disabled, and generally disadvantaged in California (and heroin users) than any other state. Perhaps they are just more visible, but the breakdown of the stats seem to agree with me[1]. Generally, conservative states just deal with things differently than liberal states For example, if other states' way of dealing with homeless people was "buy them a bus ticket to California", wouldn't that have exactly the outcome you are describing? http://www.mintpressnews.com/500-homeless-mental-patients-were-given-bus-pass-california-by-nevada-government-program/210607/ http://www.mintpressnews.com/500-homeless-mental-patients-we... The problem with one state treating the homeless well is that it simply attracts more homeless from other states, overloading the system. Homelessness really needs to be addressed on a federal level.

ocdtrekkie 10y ago
But if you actually follow the news in the Bay Area, you'd know tech companies growing and raising the cost and demand for housing is a large part of why you can't walk through San Francisco without tripping over a homeless guy. People are being driven from their apartments to make room for higher paying tech employees.
- Decade 10y ago
  And if you actually looked into the issues, you’d know that tech companies don’t like it that costs are so high. Most of them are trying to become profitable before they run out of runway. Tech companies grow and raise the demand: True. Tech companies increase the cost: False. Most of the cost increases have been NIMBYs and misguided community organizers and environmentalists. For example, a major source of funding against homes near the T light rail line has been a retired insurance industry executive and consultant. That’s not tech. If there are not enough houses near the jobs, then somebody is going to be driven out. If you had to choose for your own property, then it would be irrational not to pick the higher paying tech employee.
- r00fus 10y ago
  Don't blame Tech for what FIRE [1] is mainly responsible for. Ownership^W Rentership society and all that - it's here. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIRE_economy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIRE_economy

enraged_camel 10y ago

>>I would argue that is not necessarily the case. I have seen WAY more homeless, poor, disabled, and generally disadvantaged in California (and heroin users) than any other state. That's because California has nice weather year-around, which makes homelessness a lot more tolerable. (Same with Hawaii: lots of homeless people hanging out at beaches and lying on the the grass in parks.)