[ncallaway]

> it is a misrepresentation, as a lot of those "empty" homes are awaiting a buyer.

Which means as a society we've chosen to value the liquidity of the housing market (something that I think is really good!) over the basic dignity and needs of human beings (something that I think is even more important!).

That's a societal choice. In a society that absolutely has enough wealth to shelter and feed every person, the fact that we've chosen not to is simply a disgrace. That people die in the cold in America is a moral failing. If we were a poor nation, and couldn't afford otherwise that would be one thing. But we aren't, and it's simply a choice that we make to let people die in the cold.

[WalterBright]

Is it your proposal that any house going on the market should install a homeless person in it until it sells?

[ncallaway]

No.

I made a proposal above (though, you’ll also not that I said I thought my proposal was unlikely to be workable in practice).

But, if you review what I wrote, you’ll note I never proposed anything close to what you asked about.

My actual proposal would be this: we should invest heavily in a housing first approach to homelessness at both the federal and state level. We should invest in this as a priority, as if it will save lives because it will.

Along with that, we should invest in mental health and addiction treatment programs as a supplement.

We should tax the fuck out of the rich to do so in a revenue neutral way.

[WalterBright]

> We should tax the fuck out of the rich to do so in a revenue neutral way.

That's what California does, and the homeless problem in CA just gets worse.

[ncallaway]

The combined state and federal top marginal tax rate is 75% or more?

Is capital gains taxed at the same rate as income?

Then we aren’t taxing the fuck out of the rich.

Does the Federal government and the State of California provide stable housing to every homeless person in the state?

Well, then, what’s why the problem is getting worse.

Actually tax the rich, and actually provide housing first. Until then, we haven’t tried my proposal.

[WalterBright]

Good thing we haven't, as it would crash the economy.

https://www.caltax.org/caltax-resources/california-tax-facts...

https://taxfoundation.org/publications/federal-tax-rates-and...

BTW, the government has built housing for the poor many times. They're called "The Projects". Usually they wound up being demolished after a few years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidized_housing_in_the_Unit...

[ncallaway]

Which is why the economy collapsed in the 1950s when the top marginal tax rate was 91%, and we’ve been living in a Mad Max wasteland ever since.

[seanmcdirmid]

Taxes aren’t really bad for the rich in California. Ya, they are higher than normal, but most people who think they are excessive just don’t understand how marginal tax rates work.