In Liberal San Francisco, Tech Leaders Brawl Over Tax Proposal to Aid Homeless

1,011 Views | 9 Replies | Last: 5 yr ago by Canada2017
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?

In Liberal San Francisco, Tech Leaders Brawl Over Tax Proposal to Aid Homeless

For months, technology companies in San Francisco have fought a local ballot proposition that would impose taxes on corporations to fund initiatives to help the homeless.
But last week, that unified front crumbled when Marc Benioff, chief executive of Salesforce, the online software company that is the city's largest private employer, broke from the pack. "Homelessness is all of our responsibility," he tweeted. Then the billionaire committed $2 million to passing the tax measure and criticized his fellow tech moguls for not caring.
Now San Francisco's tech community is in an uproar over the initiative, which is known as Proposition C and will be on the ballot on Nov. 6. Venture capitalists and companies including the online payments start-up Stripe are lobbying and donating money to defeat the tax. And Jack Dorsey, chief executive of Twitter and Square, who opposes the measure, has publicly bickered with Mr. Benioff. On Friday, Mr. Dorsey tweeted, "We need to have long term solutions in place, not quick acts to make us feel good for one moment in time."
The vitriol among tech executives over the proposition has become "awkward," said Scott Wiener, a Democratic state senator who represents San Francisco and surrounding areas and who is against the tax. Still, he praised the companies for becoming more involved in local politics.

The dispute over Proposition C raises the question of what responsibilities tech companies have for problems in their own backyards. Tech firms often receive blame for exacerbating inequality and driving up property values with their hefty employee pay packages, contributing to homelessness. The question of what these companies may owe their hometowns is magnified because many of them have taken advantage of local tax breaks to spur their own growth.
Canada2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The homelessness of our fellow citizens will not be properly addressed until we make them a higher priority than the 'rights ' of illegal aliens .
LIB,MR BEARS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ee want to tax you for a problem exacerbated by our policies.

In Washington, it should be drain the swamp.
In San Francisco, it should be flush the toilet.
Golem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
1. Spend money on institutionalization of lunatics. As much as I am for freedom, when someone is a danger to themselves and others and lacks capacity (as determined with multiple chances to appeal), then they need to be taken care of in the same way it's the state's job to incarcerate criminals. Releasing crazies onto the street was a very bad idea.

2. Giving money to crazy people on the street is an even worse idea than simply letting them out onto the street. Giving grocery carts is also a bad idea..another one that come out of the leftist void they call a brain. Facilitating their life on the street is just making things worse.

3. Zoning for hotels and homes is also something that needs to be heavily curtailed. It's limitations on building or restrictions on use and labeling some low cost properties as "slums" and thus their land lords as "slum lords" which has helped exacerbate this. When there was an actual skid row, there was a very low cost, in doors, nightly location for otherwise homeless to stay. They didn't need a credit check or a monthly lease. When the left said these are evil and we need government to be the slum lords, things started getting worse. Do I want to live there or do you? Nope. But if you were homeless and could get inside for 5 out of 7 nights a week, you are better off and so is everyone else out there.

In short, government has a role, but they have abrogated that role and instead attempted to take on responsibilities which are not rightly the state's job. They gave up the minor state role (mental health institutions) and instead decided they would do their best work centrally planning the housing market. They f--ked up yet again.
JXL
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I don't see what the argument is. They should ratchet up the taxes into the stratosphere. Lefties have been assuring us that jacking up taxes is the road to prosperity and they should take this opportunity to prove it.

Portland should have done it but they chickened out. Go for it SF! Show us the economic magic of high taxes!
Gunny Hartman
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm seriously shocked to learn that Leftist Democrats are hypocrites
Guy Noir
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If they pass the bill, I wonder if more companies will move out of the San Francisco area.
Gunny Hartman
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Guy Noir said:

If they pass the bill, I wonder if more companies will move out of the San Francisco area.

Yes they will relocate to Texas so they can screw up our state also
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Guy Noir said:

If they pass the bill, I wonder if more companies will move out of the San Francisco area.
Not the big Tech companies. They will find a way to stay there

It will be the smaller companies that can't afford the homeless tax
MilliVanilli
How long do you want to ignore this user?
California lives and falls by the fortunes of tech billionaires. When Silicon Valley is up then state revenue is up, because the state budget is tethered to the progressive state income tax that sees approximately 124 individuals account for more than 46 percent of state's annual revenues.

So you can imagine why tech billionaires are little unenthused about more taxation.

Canada2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GolemIII said:

1. Spend money on institutionalization of lunatics. As much as I am for freedom, when someone is a danger to themselves and others and lacks capacity (as determined with multiple chances to appeal), then they need to be taken care of in the same way it's the state's job to incarcerate criminals. Releasing crazies onto the street was a very bad idea.

2. Giving money to crazy people on the street is an even worse idea than simply letting them out onto the street. Giving grocery carts is also a bad idea..another one that come out of the leftist void they call a brain. Facilitating their life on the street is just making things worse.

3. Zoning for hotels and homes is also something that needs to be heavily curtailed. It's limitations on building or restrictions on use and labeling some low cost properties as "slums" and thus their land lords as "slum lords" which has helped exacerbate this. When there was an actual skid row, there was a very low cost, in doors, nightly location for otherwise homeless to stay. They didn't need a credit check or a monthly lease. When the left said these are evil and we need government to be the slum lords, things started getting worse. Do I want to live there or do you? Nope. But if you were homeless and could get inside for 5 out of 7 nights a week, you are better off and so is everyone else out there.

In short, government has a role, but they have abrogated that role and instead attempted to take on responsibilities which are not rightly the state's job. They gave up the minor state role (mental health institutions) and instead decided they would do their best work centrally planning the housing market. They f--ked up yet again.


Many of our homeless do suffer from varying degrees of mental illness .

They need compassionate care in the form of treatment, shelter and security.

Against their will if necessary.

Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.