6 ms·
While sold as a tax for the homeless, we've seen over and again how $50M entrusted to 6 people with little oversight really turns out. This is the right move
by mankash666 8y ago
While sold as a tax for the homeless, we've seen over and again how $50M entrusted to 6 people with little oversight really turns out.
This is the right move
- ionised 8y agoLet's break this down. You're implying that 6 city councillors, elected and paid into the position are inherently not trustworthy enough to manage city funds, simply by vice of being part of government? And yet, Amazon, who will spend nothing on these schemes and are even less accountable than the councillors, will make better use of it? This sounds like you want to eliminate all government and tax. Would be amusing to see I suppose.
- T2_t2 8y agoWhat does Seattle currently spend on the homeless? Genuinely curious if you know any of the numbers.
- igotsideas 8y agoI looked it up at the beginning of the year but I think it was around 180 million. There was something around 10 million of private funding. So close to 200 million. Is this a quiz? Am I right? Edit: these number are for 2017.
- madeofpalk 8y agoWhen I see numbers like this, I start to understand these 'no big government' and tax minimisation people. I don't live in the US, and I've never been to Seattle, but if you can't 'solve' homelessness with 180 million, what's an extra 50 million going to do?
- ionised 8y ago180 million doesn't seem that much for a city like Seattle. Even if it was the solution isn't to stop paying taxes and get rid of the government. That's throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
- profunctor 8y agoDon't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. That money could be keeping tens of thousands of people off the streets and out of hospitals.
- megaman22 8y agoIf we're throwing cliched adages around, don't throw good money after bad. People flock to places like SF and Seattle in part because they have all of this spending and infrastructure for the homeless.
- Maybestring 8y agoAny evidence for that? I have a hard time believing people are moving to 'Rain City' to live outside.
- jschwartzi 8y agoWe host the county jail and courthouse, and in many municipalities it's illegal to be homeless, so they get picked up there, jailed here, and released here.
- ksk 8y agoIf I were homeless I'd try to go to a place that helped homeless people.
- jschwartzi 8y agoYou have no idea the scale of the problem here. It's not just a few people camping under an overpass. If you walk around Pioneer Square there are encampments on many of the blocks. There are encampments on Seattle anywhere there's grass. Drive on I5 through the city and you'll see encampments starting and ending at the city limits.
- madeofpalk 8y ago$230 million is a lot of money! I'm not saying the problem isn't worth fixing - it definitely is! But Yikes, that sure does seem like a lot doesn't it.
- bluedevil2k 8y agoAnd you’re actually implying that these people, who have not done anything even remotely successful in terms of business, elected by roughly 4% of the population of Seattle, who meet once a week for a few hours, who have split incentives to both “help the city” and get continually re-elected, who need to fundraise for elections from entities they could potentially benefit with the money...these are the people you trust more with money than one of the 5 most successful businessmen in the last 100 years?
- electricEmu 8y agoHaving worked for him, yes I'll trust the Seattle city council. You sure seem to be on this thread frequently with some hard opinions and loose facts.
- bluedevil2k 8y ago2 posts is posting frequently?
- mankash666 8y agoDon't make it personal about another HN member
- ionised 8y ago> these are the people you trust more with money than one of the 5 most successful businessmen in the last 100 years? Yes, because I don't equate being rich and 'successful' with having a social conscience. If anything I'm more inclined to believe that rich and successful person didn't do it by being a paragon of virtue. And what exactly do you think Amazon's incentives are? To the city? Come on now.
- bluedevil2k 8y agoAmazon, the corporation, should only have 1 incentive - to maximize shareholder value.
- 8y ago
- FranzFerdiNaN 8y agoBezos said he literally cannot think of anything better to do with his money than waste it going to space. While his employees suffer due to lack of water, air-conditioning and such. So no, its better to put the 50 million in the hands of 6 elected councilors instead of a private corporation who is just going to hoard it and waste it.
- alexandros 8y agoYeah! I don't approve what he's doing with his money either! We should take it from him and give it to others we like better! What could go wrong? /s
- FranzFerdiNaN 8y agoYes, actually we should take all his money from him. Because he earns it by abusing his employees, going so far they require ambulances. Due to that he should be put in jail (because he knows this happens and refuses to do anything about it).
- bluedevil2k 8y agoNo, it’s not better to give the money to elected officials - they have no incentive at all to spend the money wisely. When you’re spending other people’s money, the incentive to do what’s best for the money disappears. Further, when discussing politics, giving money to politicians leads to corruption, kickbacks, and other waste. Finally, politicians have shown time and again they are awful businessmen. Boston’s Big Dig, Seattle’s tunnel under the city, California’s high speed rail, and I could go on and on and on.
- gameswithgo 8y ago>they have no incentive at all to spend the money wisely This is very obviously not correct >Further, when discussing politics, giving money to politicians leads to corruption, kickbacks, and other waste. Thus we should give no money to governments at all! What societies have flourished under this ethos in human history? >Finally, politicians have shown time and again they are awful businessme So are many businessmen! 9 of 10 startups fail. Humans are not good at things. The success of a project depends less on whether it is run by a government or a private enterprise, and more on who is running it and how good of a job they do. NASA landed men on the moon when computers were made of cheese, they have been landing robots on mars successfully more recently, the roads get built, we drive on them, europe is smashing atoms in a huge collider learning how the universe works, the police have kept order, the US military stopped the nazis.
- sitkack 8y agoA generic attack on politicians is orthogonal the main argument, by your logic, taken to its conclusion is that the government shouldn't be funded.
- ksk 8y agoThe opposing logic, taken to its conclusion, would mean that government should get all of your money. Yeah, now we're back where we started. Nobody is saying the government should be de-funded. This is a red-herring.