San Francisco YC donation to defeat homeless prevention measure
twitter.comFrom SF Mayor London Breed: "It does not include a detailed spending plan for the $300M in taxes it seeks to add, nor regular audits of that money, nor adequate public oversight over how it’s spent.
Our homelessness spending has increased dramatically in recent years with no discernible improvement in conditions. Before we double the tax bill overnight, San Franciscans deserve accountability for the money they are already paying."
Full text here: https://medium.com/@LondonBreed/statement-from-mayor-london-...
"A yes vote is a vote in favor of authorizing the city and county of San Francisco to fund housing and homelessness services by taxing certain businesses at the following rates: 0.175 percent to 0.69 percent on gross receipts for businesses with over $50 million in gross annual receipts, or 1.5 percent of payroll expenses for certain businesses with over $1 billion in gross annual receipts and administrative offices in San Francisco. A no vote is a vote against authorizing the city and county of San Francisco to tax businesses at the above rates to fund housing and homelessness services."
we should at least have the money to address the symptoms if we cannot fix the problem.
it's definitely sad to see paulg's stance on this; it just shows where his values are .
> we should at least have the money to address the symptoms if we cannot fix the problem.
It may be worth mentioning that there's already a budget a at work approximately equal to the $300 million prop C is expected to raise. So while there are many, many problems with this whole scenario, it's possible that there being no money to address the symptoms at hand might not be among them.
before everyone dives on the "PG hates the homeless!" bandwagon - consider that perhaps there are other reasons to oppose this bill? There can be many reasons to oppose a piece of legislation beyond simply being opposed to its stated intent.
Sure, they don't hate the idea of helping houseless people, they just hate the idea of that help being legally prioritized over their RoI.
That's bullshit criticism.
This knee jerk reaction of claiming that Paul Graham is somehow greedy or against the homeless is disappointing. That London Breed, who ran for SF mayor on the premise of trying to fix homelessness, is opposed to Prop C is very telling.
Before San Francisco decides to spend more money per homeless person, I think we should figure out why SF is already spending so much more money per homeless person that cities like LA and New York. Just adding more money to the pot with little oversight to how it is spent doesn't seem like a good solution at all.
Sensationalist headline linking to a blatantly biased source - how about some fair discussion of the legislation instead?
saw this tweet this morning.
Text Good morning to everyone except @paulg, co-founder of @ycombinator, who just donated $150K to defeat a measure that will prevent 7,000 households from homelessness through eviction defense services & rental assistance.
Disgraceful. I'd like to believe many of Paul Gs opinions go against the incubator he founded but wow.
I don't know what I'm voting on this yet, but it's certainly not a simple matter, and there are many smart and compassionate people who don't support the measure. Here are the mayor's thoughts on homelessness (https://medium.com/@LondonBreed/a-bold-approach-to-homelessn...) and why they oppose the measure (https://medium.com/@LondonBreed/statement-from-mayor-london-...) As I mentioned I don't know which side I'm on yet, but to just lash out at someone who opposes the measure as "disgraceful" means you're either uninformed or unwilling to consider other reasonable perspectives as legitimate. Either way, you can do better
Really? Have you read the details of it? There are many valid reasons to be against it.