6 ms·

* World-class rock climbing, mountaineering, and hiking less than an hour's drive from downtown * I moved here from Canada, the weather really isn't that bad;

* World-class rock climbing, mountaineering, and hiking less than an hour's drive from downtown * I moved here from Canada, the weather really isn't that bad; it's been a beautiful spring here while all my Canadian friends are still dealing with snow * Seattle has a huge number of sakura and so the city has beautiful pink cherry blossom clouds everywhere for the entire month of April * The entire environment is so incredibly lush & green; it's called the Emerald City for a reason! * The food is quite good, actually It's funny that the thing you think Seattle has going for it - low taxes - directly contributes to the issue of homelessness and half of your complaints.

zachthewf 7y ago
The uniquely differentiating thing in Seattle is the geography (as you say). If you don't care about having nearby skiing and mountaineering (and more but you get the idea), you can do better elsewhere.
burrows 7y ago
> It's funny that the thing you think Seattle has going for it - low taxes - directly contributes to the issue of homelessness and half of your complaints. We should reward non-productive people with other people's money? You don't give the rat his meal until he completes the maze.
- ahelwer 7y ago
  Even if you want to analyze it from a psychopathic economics perspective, it still makes sense to provide socialized housing and free mental health support to people who are homeless, because there is no other way they'll become "productive" again without that base. Or you can view it as us paying for the negative externality of rising housing prices forcing people onto the streets from so many of us software engineers moving to the area. Or you can view people experiencing homelessness as humans inherently worthy of dignity. No matter which way you view it though, your approach of letting them die in the streets is the wrong one.
  - burrows 7y ago
    > it still makes sense to provide socialized housing and free mental health support to people who are homeless, because there is no other way they'll become "productive" again without that base. People that agree with this statement should organize and do just that. Leave everyone else out of it. > Or you can view it as us paying for the negative externality of rising housing prices forcing people onto the streets from so many of us software engineers moving to the area. No one "deserves" a house. Move somewhere cheaper if you can't afford to live in Seattle. > Or you can view people experiencing homelessness as humans inherently worthy of dignity. No matter which way you view it though, your approach of letting them die in the streets is the wrong one. Your stated alternative is worse. 1. Tax a productive person. 2. Make a big fuss about new government social program. 3. Drug users still die in street.
    - ahelwer 7y ago
      You'll be happy to know we are indeed organizing! https://www.taxamazon.net/sign https://www.taxamazon.net/sign Perhaps one day you'll appreciate the psychopathy of telling people they should just move away from their lifelong home. Not everyone is a detached knowledge worker hopping around sampling cities like they're a plate of hors d'oeuvres. Moving is also quite expensive.
      - burrows 7y ago
        > You'll be happy to know we are indeed organizing! https://www.taxamazon.net/sign https://www.taxamazon.net/sign You believe the low income housing market is underserved. 1. Raise money (your "Tax Amazon" friends are a good start). 2. Build housing. 3. Sell to underserved segment. > Perhaps one day you'll appreciate the psychopathy of telling people they should just move away from their lifelong home. Not everyone is a detached knowledge worker hopping around sampling cities like they're a plate of hors d'oeuvres. You flirt!
  - WalterBright 7y ago
    > the negative externality of rising housing prices forcing people onto the streets The vast bulk of the Seattle homeless are homeless due to drug and alcohol addiction. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpAi70WWBlw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpAi70WWBlw Even "60 Minutes" did a segment on it in the last year, and they kept finding drug and alcohol addiction underlying the problems of the Seattle homeless they profiled.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
WalterBright 7y ago
> low taxes - directly contributes to the issue of homelessness and half of your complaints. I've lived here for 40 years. It's always had low taxes, but the problems you're talking about are very recent.
- ahelwer 7y ago
  Yes, the rise in rent has been quite dramatic recently - and our social services have been utterly ill-prepared to handle the fallout, because of low taxes.
  - WalterBright 7y ago
    Despite low tax rates, tax revenue for the city has risen dramatically alongside the local economic boom.
    - ahelwer 7y ago
      Yes, but real estate prices have risen even faster - and helping people experiencing homelessness fundamentally requires real estate to house them.
  - malandrew 7y ago
    So you're saying that we should raise taxes to spend on the homeless problem? That hasn't worked for San Francisco, which spends a crazy amount per person and the only thing they have to show for it is more homelessness. Perhaps your heuristic is wrong. Perhaps, when you pay for something, you tend to get more of it, not less. I can't think of a single place that spends money on homelessness that doesn't get more of it. Furthermore, if a city is expensive and getting more expensive like SF and Seattle, it means that city is becoming harder for people without decent earning power to stick around. It's like a video game being changed from easy mode to hard mode. Seattle and SF are hard mode, which means most people at the bottom will fail to ever succeed there. By spending the money in Seattle and San Francisco, you're throwing good money after bad money because you're helping many people stay in a place in which they likely won't ever succeed. The money would be better spent in locales around the country where it's easy mode for someone to get back on their feet. Trying to solve homelessness in Seattle and San Francisco is one of the most egregious wastes of money I've ever seen. It's practically a homelessness industrial complex in San Francisco already and starting to become one in Seattle. Everyone advocating most ardently for it are people whose salary is paid from these tax dollars. It's the Shirky Principle in action. https://kk.org/thetechnium/the-shirky-prin/ https://kk.org/thetechnium/the-shirky-prin/

zachthewf 7y ago

The uniquely differentiating thing in Seattle is the geography (as you say). If you don't care about having nearby skiing and mountaineering (and more but you get the idea), you can do better elsewhere.

burrows 7y ago

> It's funny that the thing you think Seattle has going for it - low taxes - directly contributes to the issue of homelessness and half of your complaints. We should reward non-productive people with other people's money? You don't give the rat his meal until he completes the maze.

ahelwer 7y ago
Even if you want to analyze it from a psychopathic economics perspective, it still makes sense to provide socialized housing and free mental health support to people who are homeless, because there is no other way they'll become "productive" again without that base. Or you can view it as us paying for the negative externality of rising housing prices forcing people onto the streets from so many of us software engineers moving to the area. Or you can view people experiencing homelessness as humans inherently worthy of dignity. No matter which way you view it though, your approach of letting them die in the streets is the wrong one.
- burrows 7y ago
  > it still makes sense to provide socialized housing and free mental health support to people who are homeless, because there is no other way they'll become "productive" again without that base. People that agree with this statement should organize and do just that. Leave everyone else out of it. > Or you can view it as us paying for the negative externality of rising housing prices forcing people onto the streets from so many of us software engineers moving to the area. No one "deserves" a house. Move somewhere cheaper if you can't afford to live in Seattle. > Or you can view people experiencing homelessness as humans inherently worthy of dignity. No matter which way you view it though, your approach of letting them die in the streets is the wrong one. Your stated alternative is worse. 1. Tax a productive person. 2. Make a big fuss about new government social program. 3. Drug users still die in street.
  - ahelwer 7y ago
    You'll be happy to know we are indeed organizing! https://www.taxamazon.net/sign https://www.taxamazon.net/sign Perhaps one day you'll appreciate the psychopathy of telling people they should just move away from their lifelong home. Not everyone is a detached knowledge worker hopping around sampling cities like they're a plate of hors d'oeuvres. Moving is also quite expensive.
    - burrows 7y ago
      > You'll be happy to know we are indeed organizing! https://www.taxamazon.net/sign https://www.taxamazon.net/sign You believe the low income housing market is underserved. 1. Raise money (your "Tax Amazon" friends are a good start). 2. Build housing. 3. Sell to underserved segment. > Perhaps one day you'll appreciate the psychopathy of telling people they should just move away from their lifelong home. Not everyone is a detached knowledge worker hopping around sampling cities like they're a plate of hors d'oeuvres. You flirt!
- WalterBright 7y ago
  > the negative externality of rising housing prices forcing people onto the streets The vast bulk of the Seattle homeless are homeless due to drug and alcohol addiction. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpAi70WWBlw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpAi70WWBlw Even "60 Minutes" did a segment on it in the last year, and they kept finding drug and alcohol addiction underlying the problems of the Seattle homeless they profiled.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

WalterBright 7y ago

> low taxes - directly contributes to the issue of homelessness and half of your complaints. I've lived here for 40 years. It's always had low taxes, but the problems you're talking about are very recent.

ahelwer 7y ago
Yes, the rise in rent has been quite dramatic recently - and our social services have been utterly ill-prepared to handle the fallout, because of low taxes.
- WalterBright 7y ago
  Despite low tax rates, tax revenue for the city has risen dramatically alongside the local economic boom.
  - ahelwer 7y ago
    Yes, but real estate prices have risen even faster - and helping people experiencing homelessness fundamentally requires real estate to house them.
- malandrew 7y ago
  So you're saying that we should raise taxes to spend on the homeless problem? That hasn't worked for San Francisco, which spends a crazy amount per person and the only thing they have to show for it is more homelessness. Perhaps your heuristic is wrong. Perhaps, when you pay for something, you tend to get more of it, not less. I can't think of a single place that spends money on homelessness that doesn't get more of it. Furthermore, if a city is expensive and getting more expensive like SF and Seattle, it means that city is becoming harder for people without decent earning power to stick around. It's like a video game being changed from easy mode to hard mode. Seattle and SF are hard mode, which means most people at the bottom will fail to ever succeed there. By spending the money in Seattle and San Francisco, you're throwing good money after bad money because you're helping many people stay in a place in which they likely won't ever succeed. The money would be better spent in locales around the country where it's easy mode for someone to get back on their feet. Trying to solve homelessness in Seattle and San Francisco is one of the most egregious wastes of money I've ever seen. It's practically a homelessness industrial complex in San Francisco already and starting to become one in Seattle. Everyone advocating most ardently for it are people whose salary is paid from these tax dollars. It's the Shirky Principle in action. https://kk.org/thetechnium/the-shirky-prin/ https://kk.org/thetechnium/the-shirky-prin/