[grasshopperpurp]

As maym86 said, I'd be happy to contribute to the pool of resources that would allow something like this to be sustainable. Would you not?

>The city pays for it. The shelter runs it.

"It is a win-win," said Presbyterian Night Shelter CEO Toby Owen. "We want a clean neighborhood that speaks hope, that speaks dignity to our homeless guests. And it also provides income for these individuals so they can move out and be successful without living in a homeless shelter."

Last year, Clean Slate put 40 homeless people to work, Owen said. Approximately 3,856 tons of trash was collected by Clean Slate workers. And they don't just clean up trash on the street -- they also work as janitors for businesses.

https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Fort-Worth-Pays-Homeless-P...

[jpttsn]

There's a difference between paying a $10 hourly wage and contributing to a pool of resources.

I'm guessing my own contribution would be far less than $10 per hour if this were tax financed.

If you and I can agree to each pay $5/h, maybe let's start there and find other people who also want to pay? Wouldn't that be better?

[grasshopperpurp]

Kind of an a-la-carte approach to civic responsibilities? I can envision ways in which it'd work, and people would feel better about it (in general) than they do taxes. It seems like something like this would work best at a local level, which would obviously apply to the particular example we're discussing. In theory, I'd be on board with it, as long as federal programs/taxes remained. If you found a way to implement it on a larger scale, I'd be surprised/impressed.

[jpttsn]

But why should it be surprising? So many people advocate for change just like you do; what mechanism could keep the idealism from being realizable?