When Republicans display their stupid black or white, “with us or against us” thinking on practically every subject of importance, and you feel a righteous criticism coming on, please re-read this post.

Or maybe the SCC did a crappy job.

Well the thing is it wasn't an "Amazon tax" it was a tax that would have effected all kinds of local and on many cases the costs would have just been passed on to the workers anyways.

This was poorly thought out virtue signaling not some "grand crusade to end homelessness"

This is pretty much the social contract Capitalism offers to those who will never find themselves on the top rungs of the economic ladder, but who desperately cling to the vast middle: side with us and we might let you climb a rung or two farther up - but not too far - but in exchange you have to continually plant your foot on the heads of anyone below you, both to maintain your own footing and to encourage them to do the same to those even further down. Because, as we are constantly reminded: the conditions of both wealth and poverty are due exclusively to the choices made by those in each group, and so everyone deserves to occupy the station in which they find themselves. But the truth is those at the very top see no appreciable difference between the middle and those at the very bottom, and those at the bottom see everyone above them as an obstacle to any possibility of advancement. This is deliberate, fomented by those at the top to set the bottom and middle against each other, rather than focusing their attention, energy, and resources to consolidate their considerably larger numbers in opposition to them. In reality, the bottom and middle have much more in common with each other, but the middle is deliberately made to believe their interests lie more in solidarity to those at the top, who exploit that for all its worth.

This reminds me--is city leadership taking any steps to figure out how we ended up spending $12 million per mile on a bike lane? Or have we just written that off and moved on to the next boondoggle?

Cranky and day-drinking is no way to go through life, son.

@3:

That's completely untrue: with very few exceptions employers are expressly forbidden by state and federal labor law to pass along the normal costs of doing business by deducting those from employees' wages. And those exceptions apply only to things that are actually utilized by the employee or provided for their benefit: e.g. shift meals, uniform cleaning, and tools and equipment used directly by the employee. A city tax imposed on the business would under no circumstance meet that criteria. They can and of course DO pass them along to consumers and/or end-users.

Thank you for this Charles. Please never stop.

The headline says it all: projected disingenuous hyperbole.

I doubt that Amazon would have supported a tax to pay for bike infrastructure if the tax was presented as "let's tax Amazon to pay for bike lanes", and literally referred to as the "Amazon tax" thereafter by a sitting councilmember. The style of her rhetoric matches Trump's, and she is toxic to this city. Having a socialist on the council should be good for moving the council left, but instead of doing her job (legislating), she holds a bullhorn and demonizes constituents (not just Amazon). There is a place for protest and rabble-rousing -- it's how we get important, ignored issues visible to the majority -- but Kshama isn't doing both that and her job at the same time. She does not write (and often does not read) legislation (to the exasperation of her colleagues), she does not represent her constituents (or even respond to small businesses that reach out to her), and instead tries to wage a national movement while derelict in her actual (and important) duties. And so, with a city leader weaponizing her elected position, we are left with a Seattle that has never been so divided and, honestly, never sounded so Republican in conversations city-wide. People see her as the brand of the Seattle-left, and Seattleites are, to an extent, fleeing the values of the left (read Eli Sanders' article from yesterday about that). Charles, people did not turn against the head tax people it taxes employers more when they create more jobs (even if they cite that as a reason to be against it). People turned against it because Kshama Sawant created "Amazon tax" headlines around the country that embarrassed us as a city.

Well it seems like one of the prevailing myths here is that the homeless crisis 'grows and grows' because they are all moving here from elsewhere for some obscure reason. I say myth because the last study I saw on this subject concluded that only about 12% of the homeless population has recently moved here from elsewhere. It seems pretty clear: the skyrocketing cost of housing in this city is far and away the biggest cause of this crisis and no amount of increased government 'efficiency' is going to make a dent. Perhaps now that all the squawkers have got their 'job killing' tax repealed they'll get on coming up with a better way to address the problem? Or maybe they'll just go back to sqawking about all the homeless shitting in their alley and camping on their parking strips.

@4. What a crock of shit. There’s enough room at the top for everyone. There’s an easy path to the middle for those at the bottom. No one is holding anyone down by force except in your pathetic, weak chinned world view and your victimized imagination.

People who are homeless can absolutely get out of homelessness with a minimum of effort and a few good decisions.

Why don’t you ask some ex homeless people who are now thriving what they did to get out and make their life better instead of superimposing your sad life skills and loser attitude on an entire population of people.

"Charles, people did not turn against the head tax because it taxes employers more when they create more jobs (even if they cite that as a reason to be against it). People turned against it because Kshama Sawant created "Amazon tax" headlines around the country that embarrassed us as a city." ...typo fixed

@5: that was mostly irresponsible reporting by the Times. The $12M/mile bike lanes were mostly updating infrastructure downtown, and could have just as easily come out of some other budget. The actual and direct bike lane aspects (you can google to find the breakdown) that aren't needed for pedestrian, utility, sidewalk, signal, etc., are a fraction of the cost. Sure, the money was still spent, but one could argue the majority should be tagged as pedestrian, vehicle, and public utilities expenditures, and not blamed on bike lanes.

@5:

The cost for the 7th Avenue Mobility Improvement project is $3.8 mm, which, based on the distance covered would pencil out to about $12 mm a mile. But of course the project doesn't actually traverse that distance, so the figure is completely conflated by the anti-bike contingent as if that were the actual amount being spent. And of course much of that isn't just for the lane itself, but also includes other improvements such as upgrading signals, and adding curb bulbs to shorten pedestrian crossings, and all occurring in one of the most heavily utilized traffic corridors in the City. But the "all city expenditures are wasteful by definition" contingent always conveniently leaves out those pesky little details.

More info at: https://www.seattle.gov/transportation/projects-and-programs/programs/bike-program/protected-bike-lanes/7th-ave-mobility-improvements

@11:

If there were truly "enough room at the top for everyone" we'd all already be there by now, wouldn't we?

@15: instead of a pyramid, if you make the economy a mastaba, a really broad, short mastaba, then there's room for everyone at the top. in theory, since it's never happened before.

never pegged muffy for a communist, but these are strange times.

I ride my bike from West Seattle to Fremont and back every day, and I love the bike lanes. However, I would sacrifice each and every inch of the bike lanes if we could use that money to fund a compassionate long-term solution to our homelessness surge. We're spending tons of money on frivolities while neglecting those who need our attention most.

@10- If I recall correctly, only 6% of the people in that survey cited "couldn't afford rent increase" as the reason for being homeless. Another 11% (I think) said "eviction." If those numbers are correct, the reason who are on the street because of the cost of housing is comparable to the number who have recently moved here.

I wish "we" could magically separate the mentally ill from the "worthy homeless" and the "heroin tourists". My heart breaks for the mentally ill people on the streets and there are a LOT of them. Having a mental illness myself but lucky enough to have insurance and good health care coverage, I am particularly aware of those who are obviously suffering from mental health demons. Sure, there are a bunch of heroin tourists but there are also a bunch of just average people who simply do not "fit in" with Seattle's glorious digital ascendency so they have no jobs, no money and nowhere to live. Unskilled labor is homeless these days.

"...enough room at the top for everyone"

HAHAHAHAHA

That literally defies the entire foundational premise of market based economies. I mean, Jesus. No self-respecting capitalist could possibly believe that stupid and have any grasp of how economics works.

You really are stupid pile of shit.

I'm sorry but I come from a family that instilled a strong work ethic in me and my siblings. I understand that not all homeless individuals are in a position to "clean their act up" and get a job easily, and while I empathize for those in that situation, we CANNOT carry the burden for those who are "able" and/or NOT willing to improve their OWN situation.

I volunteer feeding the homeless at a local church, which is more than most of you can say. However, the cause of homelessness in this city IS NOT because of Amazon or any other large local corporation. A large group of the homeless are not even from here! WHY do my hard earned tax dollars have to go towards helping those who don't even help themselves?!

Half these homeless people have working cell phones. I'm willing to help those who are willing to help themselves! if not, your homelessness is not my problem.

@19 -- I can't at the moment find where I recently read this (so apologies for no citation), but many of the homeless who are addicts became addicts after becoming homeless and while subjected to the stresses of homelessness. FWIW

@21: you see homeless with cell phones as less worthy than homeless without them? Phones cost orders of magnitude less than an apartment.

A working phone is a requirement for searching for a job.

Charles you’re r right about most stuff except the dog poop. Do you know Seattle budget for dogs is $100,000 a year, even though the number of dogs is greater then the number of kids. So maybe check your facts before shitting on us dog owners.

@16:

Or maybe a really broad flat-topped ziggurat...

@23:

Yeah, it's funny when you hear these brawny bootsrappers scream "GET A JOB, parasite!" out of one side of their gob-holes, then in the next breath scream "stop buying the ONE personal item that might actually help you GET A JOB!" Not to mention the fact that many of them may have in fact purchased those phones when they were still gainfully employed and housed. My wife has a four year old iPhone 6 that she's never seen the need to replace, and I imagine some of the homeless folks out there are using even older phones or else pre-paid "burner" phones that go for as little as $10.

Oh, and the Nikkita Oliver who was, in 2017, going to consider putting bike lanes on hold to fund homeless projects had this to say about the housing levy we’d passed in 2016:

ECB: Did you support the housing levy?

NO: Which levy?

ECB: The one that passed last year, that will bring in $290 million to build affordable housing.

NO: Honestly I don’t remember.

https://thecisforcrank.com/2017/05/15/the-c-is-for-crank-interviews-nikkita-oliver/

@21 I don't know buddy, how's this: would you say that in the richest country on the planet people should be living in squalor on the street? Are you going to assert that is in any way shape or form civilized or you can claim that the society you inhabit is in any way shape or form civilized if people who can't get it together are relegated to living like animals?

@25:

And we collectively allow them to horde that massive amount of wealth because too many of us have bought into the myth - propagated by the wealthy - that we too might someday, with the plenty of hard work, perseverance, skill, and ambition (and a LOT of luck), attain the lofty ranks of the wealthy; and we wouldn't want to find ourselves under some sort of social, legal, or moral obligation to give up even a tiny fraction of we've accumulated in order to grant someone else even the smallest measure of human dignity.

It almost never happens, but at the same time people continue to be seduced by the dream; that's why we throw down billions of dollars every year on lottery tickets.

@25 @26

You know, since we've brought it up, I've noticed that large-scale Communist systems don't seem to have enough room for everyone at the top, either, so I'm thinking we might risk missing the essence of the problem if we spend all day banging away at Capitalism.

Capitalist representative democracy certainly does have a rather nasty case of inequality these days, but dear lord, it's hardly the only system of political economy to suffer from it.

@11, you state that homelessness can be defeated with a little hard work and some good decisions. That is simply not true. MIT economist Peter Temin's research shows that it takes 20 years of almost nothing going wrong for the typical person born into poverty to escape that condition. No major illness, and probably very few minor ones. No accidents, nothing. And for 20 years of working hard, you might end up 'socially mobile' enough to enter the middle class.

My kids go to a seattle public school where 15pc of the kids are homeless. I've seen first hand the very real disadvantage that puts them in, in terms of being able to learn, of being able to "pull themselves up by their bootstraps". They dont even have boots. And even by dint of really hard work, they'll still need two decades of good luck to make it out.

@32 Hey so let's create more of them by not doing anything more. Good thinking! Ooh it would be sweet justice if every one of you anti-tax twits got a homeless encampment in your backyard. If there is karma...

@15&16. If you had the intelligence, the drive, the work ethic , and the vision...sure. You could be at the top. But you don’t. That’s why you don’t believe it’s atainable.

Not all people are created equal. Some people settle for a 9-5 and a paycheck. Good on them. If you want to get to the top you have to do more than that though. Right? And if you do more, plan more, become more creative and hard working, hey, what do you know? No one is stepping on your neck holding you down and you can just pop right up to the next level.

Immigrants from all over the world come here and crush at this system. Natives...not so much anymore. Once you figure it out though, it’s pretty awesome to feel self determined and in control of your life and finances.

@34: “Hey so let's create more of them by not doing anything more.“

That beats creating more homeless by taxing our jobs and throwing the money at the same failed programs and ideas which got us more homeless.

Your idea is at least less expensive!

Hence, repeal of the head tax.

See how that worked?

@36 Yeah, except you cranks were predicting the same sort of apocalypse with the minimum wage increase and instead unemployment is at a historic low and thousands more people have moved here. Doesn't seem like you have a super good track record with your dire prognostications. Managed to put the fear of God into the heart of the Seattle electorate this time it seems though. You and Amazon's money.

@31. Nice. According to pew research center there are only 3 things you need to do to successfully move out of poverty and into the middle class.
1. Graduate high school.
2. Don’t have kids before you’re married.
3. Get and maintain a full time job. Any job.

97% success rate for moving out of poverty and into the middle class with just those three simple guidelines.

Also. I’m a formerly homeless heroin junkie myself. Born into poverty and abuse. Now I own my own business and make over 6 figures a year and it didn’t take me 20 years to turn that corner. It took 3. One to get my life in order, break bad habits and abandon my vices. 2. I worked hard, excelled at my job and took notes on how to run the business I was working for. Third year I started my own business, built a client base, made mistakes and learned from them and never looked back.

If you haven’t been there, you don’t know. If you don’t know, don’tpreach you just look silly to me.

32 So what do you do to alleviate Poverty? Complaining about the conditions of poverty and slamming the poor is not going to do it.

This is a system is not working. Jails are being built unhindered. More police are recruited. Thats the homes for the poor capitalism provides. No questions asked. Do you demand that Amazon et al pay up to clean up the messes they have caused?

@35 Come on ace, even you know you are talking out your ass here. This country has some of the lowest social mobility of any developed country nowadays. Lots of people simply can't get their shit together. That they are then left to live like feral dogs, in the richest country on earth, is a travesty.

You are full of it Muffy. Now you are resorting to fiction ( you made it up).

Leave it to Charles to brand the homeless with a new name: “The Wretched”. It isn’t Trump, it isnt conservatives, its liberals and progressives who as usual have all the branding and none of the product to fix the issue. Which is really the true irony here. Seattle, liberals and progressives in particular, created the crapbox they are living in now going well back to Obama and the “give me” mentality that welcomes the diversity of all odors, filth, crime, drugs and dangerous recreational vehicles man has to offer. It is why it’s no longer Seattle but now aptly named “Freeattle”. So really, what Freeattle needs to do now is look hard at the problem, make the hard decisions that’s best for the whole of society and follow through with action, which let’s face it, will never happen because if it could it would have done it long before it got to this point. “The Wretched” aren’t the homeless it’s the people who allowed the homeless to exist and that sits squarely on everyone in the city who keep voting for more of it every election cycle.

Mr. Thornhill you must mean the .01% and their owned politicians. They allowed the situation to exist because profit is more important to them than human decency. Trump is a fascist. Get real.

@39&40. Don’t give a fuck what you believe, but why would I make that shit up? Cuz it’s cool to live in a 92 explorer and shoot speedballs til you OD? Cuz it’s hip to grow up poor as fuck and beaten within an inch of your life until you decide that normal people don’t live like that and move on at 14?

Yeah. You believe in the fiction that people sell you about how hopeless and inevitable it is to be homeless and how without other people’s money you’re never going to get out. How could I expect you to see a piece of non fiction if it slapped you in your stupid faces?

Good Afternoon Charles,
I agree with @33, David in Shoreline. Succinct. I too, do not hate the homeless.

I believe Indira Gandhi once remarked "Poverty is the greatest polluter". The homeless are no doubt poverty-stricken. But, the homeless like the rich and everyone in between are responsible for what is left. We are all responsible for this planet.

Yes, they do leave much of a mess. They don't need to.

BTW, I just read about the repeal of the head tax by the Seattle City Council. Wow, that was a waste of time.

So, if that is true Muffy. You got real lucky. This is not a system that works for most people. I have seen it and lived it. Most addicted people are on the streets, dying or in prison. Addiction is deadly and few people make it out without serious help. Three people I loved and still love died on me trying to get clean. They died far to young. Help? They were put in jail and prison and treated with contempt.

I’m sorry you were mistreated.

This system does not offer hope but the people can offer hope to each other when we stand together against the abuse and mistreatment of others including the homeless.

Nikkita Oliver. Whatever happened to her?

44 Amazon has a responsibility to clean up the mess they created period.

Catalina - She is still active. You are just not hearing about it.

@42, the question that really needs to be asked by everyone is not what someone else has done for those in need, what have you done for those in need. Anything else is merely shifting the blame for the individuals’ and society’s lack of responsibility for their fellow man or themselves. “Trump is a fascist” is not a logical premise since after almost two years there has been no sign of fascism. No newpspers like The Stranger being forced to shutter, No armed forces marching down the streets daily, no people being thrown in prison for political dissent, no groups of people being lined up against walls in the public view for execution, no books and bookstores being burned, none of the other signs of being under an authoritarian government. On the other hand, over the last decade, liberal Seattle and the West Coast in general, has sold itself to foreign investors who are backed by- survey says - authoritarian governments. You will notice the dates below are Obama-years. So really the proof, thus far is that Washington State and pretty much the West Coast have chosen to live under authoritarian rule for a dollar, its just blaming Trump for its own stupidity that has been ongoing long before Trump considered running for office.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelpeck/2012/09/12/china-tells-oregon-town-take-down-that-tibet-mural/#7a51660c3bf0

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-the-chinese-are-snapping-up-real-estate-in-the-u-s/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ellensheng/2017/03/02/seattle-real-estate-sees-surge-in-chinese-interest-after-vancouver-enacts-15-tax/#7fc2997265e1

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/09/24/chinas-influence-over-hollywood-grows/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.d1f4ea5e34bc

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2015/05/american-universities-are-addicted-to-chinese-students/394517/

https://www.chronicle.com/article/Chinese-Donors-Step-Up-Giving/238736

@46. I am actively involved with people in their addictions, people who are trying to get clean and I have a support network (not 12 step) that has maintained sobriety. I know more than three people who od’d and died this year.

Addiction is a motherfucking beast. It’s got a life of its own and one mistake people who are not addicts make is believing that they can fix addicts by fixing their situation and treating them like they’re normal human beings. They’re not. If they’re in their addiction They are conniving pieces of shit who only want to get over on you. Treat them like humans, with kindness, patience, and tolerance, but don’t give them shit. Make their world as small as possible where they have to work that much harder just to maintain that lifestyle.

At the end, I had no one and nothing left. I’d literally died twice and woken up in the hospital deaf in both ears for three days and immediately tore my iv out, walked out and scored again. When the light went on it had nothing to do with services, or housing, or people respecting my humanity.

Take it from someone who’s been there. It’s not impossible to get out. It’s just not easy. And if your life is easy as it is...why would you want to change it by doing something immense and difficult?

To #9.
The spectacle at today's council meeting should make it clear that Kshama Sawant is not a Socialist. She and her movement are black bloc anarchists. They really don't care to have ideas, they just want to break the system.

muffy @38 - it was Brookings, not Pew. And the figure was 98%, not 97%.

But 98% of what?

98% of AMERICAN ADULTS who achieved those three things were not in poverty afterwards (75% were in the middle class). That tells us absolutely nothing about the power of those three things to lift people out of poverty. Because it wasn't a survey of people who started in poverty.

Think about it.

Also, hey good for you for your journey and success. But remember, the plural of anecdote is not data.

@37:

If you’d simply clicked on the link that is my nym, then gone back to the time of debate over Seattle’s $15/hour minimum wage, you could have read for yourself how staunchly I defended it. But you didn’t bother. You’d rather humiliate yourself by dumping a pile of demonstrably false statements on here than learn anything at all about your fellow citizens.

Have you any thoughts as to exactly how those fellow citizens just pasted you with this epic, stinging defeat? Or will it forever remain a mystery to you? Your choice, pal.

@53. Youre right. It was brookings. But your logic makes NO sense. If those three things achieved have a 98% success rate, how the fuck do you deduce that poor we’re not included. 98% of people who achieved those 3 things were not poor or no longer poor. If that isn’t a blueprint for a poor person to follow to get out of poverty, what is?

Also, if you don’t have the disease of addiction, you are ignorant to how it works. That’s truth. Singular. It’s a perspective that non addicts just can not grasp unless highly trained. Not because it’s complex, but because it’s so counterintuitive and fucked up. And what data are you presenting to refute any of what I’m saying? Try the real world approach with what I’m saying. Go make friends with an addict. Give them a place to stay, take care of their food, shelter, bills, but let them continue to use without judgement or consequence. Let me know when that approach garners recovery.

Services for addicts should be readily available, but 100% contingent on complete abstinence.

52 That’s a lie and you should face that. Wall street et al is destroying peoples lives every day.

@54 Yeah I'm going to go back two years and research your previous posts. Hey, we should all be doing our due diligence here!

As I mentioned, Amazon's fucking money had an outsize influence here, and we'll never know if our 'fellow citizens' were for or against really, will we?

Anyway, you're up pal. What's your answer to what is an obviously huge problem? You are fond of your studies. Well one of them said that the city needed to spend twice as much as it is spending. Pretty likely spending more money needs to be at least part of the solution. Where is it going to come from?

50 Don’t take it for granted that others haven’t experienced addiction.

The 12 step program treats people with compassion and love. This has saved many lives. And people have achieved complete abstinence. Discounting people that are struggling with it doesn’t help. Russell Brand’s Recovery video is an example of that program.

27: Jesus, dude, why can you STILL not let it go about Nikki's response to that question? She's not even a candidate anymore.

It no longer matters that she gave you that answer.
We now know the person you elected will do nothing about homelessness but send in the damn cops and give tax incentives to the Bezosoars of the world.

So, for the forseeable future, we're stuck with nothing but the uselessness of trivially small private charity programs and soup kitchens, mixed with fatuous lectures about pulling yourself up by your bootstraps and "gumption"(a word that never meant anything and never helped anyone).

Btw, if you literally try to pull yourself up by your bootstraps, all you to is pull yourself off of your feet and land on your face.

It's the system, not "not trying hard enough".

@55 - 98pc of adults who could do those 3 things were out of poverty. But where did those 98pc of people start? For all we know they all started out of poverty. The data tells us absolutely nothing about how achievable those three things are for people who are in poverty, nothing about how many people who start in poverty can use those three things to get out.

It's exactly like saying, the one key thing people need to do to not end up in poverty is to have $100,000 dollars in the bank the whole time. 100% of people who can achieve that do not end up in poverty!!!

@21 The Seattle Times published data that the overwhelming majority of homeless in Seattle are from this area. Quite the opposite of what you wrote. Plus, you can get very inexpensive cell phones these days - for 10 dollars, even - or free. If someone is homeless and has a cell phone - that's a good thing. What if a homeless woman needs to call the police about an assailant? How are they supposed to make phone calls about jobs or housing? What if they're parents and need to phone the school? How are people supposed to try to get out of homelessness if they don't have a phone? Keep in mind, too, there are also different forms of homelessness - different levels of destitution. Just because someone isn't doing even worse than what you already see - doesn't mean they don't need a helping hand.

Terrific comment, CM.

The goal of all EHT opponents is to turn Seattle into one big Hooverville.

@57: “Yeah I'm going to go back two years and research your previous posts. Hey, we should all be doing our due diligence here!”

So, you’re choosing ignorance, then. Good luck with that. Let us know how well that continues to work for you.

Hate the homeless? Go fuck yourself.

You and the crybaby SCC sycophants really can't get it through your thick skulls. Seattle/King County has spend inordinate amounts of money on the homelessness issue, yet things got way worse. Time and time again we are reminded how inept Seattle is at managing projects and programs. Homelessness is no different. Poor accountability, lack of coordination, inconsistent approaches, disparate methodologies by 3rd service providers (with little/no accountability) all with the net result of increasing homelessness.

Regular Seattle folk---with a little bit of critical-thinking skills--have had enough. Way too much skin in the game with an extremely low return on the investment. The city and the SCC suck at their jobs and cannot be trusted any longer. It would be better if King County took over the entire homelessness operation (they're a regional provider anyways).

So spare me the "Seattle hates homeless" diatribe. It's such a weak assertion and a cop out to boot.

This has nothing to do with "hating the homeless." It has to do with understanding the money handed over to the city of Seattle is indeed going down a black hole.

It is not hating the homeless, but the media's incessant drumbeat that "we" aren't doing "enough" when "we" can only meet people halfway. Most of us are busy taking care of our own shit, volunteering here and there, donating here and there, taking care of ourselves and our families. Paying taxes. Working overtime and weekends. Sucking up stressful jobs, the kind of jobs that result in city revenue through retail spending, car tabs, etc. Planning for our old age. Society, at best, can solve any social ill halfway. The people needing to get their shit together have a job too, and that is DOING SOMETHING with the help offered. We could have 100's of well funded programs to help people on the margins, we could poop gold coins to pay for it...but people STILL have to take those resources and DO SOMETHING.

But no, it's OUR FAULT..... Rinse, repeat.

One of my (very) wealthy Capitol Hill neighbors said, "I'd rather have Amazon workers than homeless people." She explained that if we stop giving freebies to the homeless they will leave. She is not alone. I've never seen the block speak up (or seem as threatened) as they did about the then-looming head tax.

@7 Tell that to the dozen people my employer laid off because it's cheaper to run a call center in Florida. Or the other 15 that won't be receiving planned raises...

Face it this tax hurt working people...

No one hates the homeless and no one hates taxes. We hate the fact that "leadership" wants more and more money to waste on pet projects or inefficient solutions. Like $9M for 500 "beds" (and not one time, that's an annual cost).

@61. The concept is lost on you. You don’t need 100k to take any of those actions. There are zero barriers to taking those actions. All are readily accessible with the exceptions of a full time job which in an economy with less than 4% unemployment...is a pretty low barrier.

You basically just have to see the value in those things and therein lies the problem. People have shitty examples in early life (parents). Cultural norms place way more value on instant gratification and shallow accomplishments than in work and deferred gratification. Some Communities have poor models for success (drug dealing, crime, violence, dropping out). There are reasons and explanations why people don’t value that model (I didn’t and I didn’t accomplish some of those things anyways), but no barriers.

Try again.

@59: Read Charles’ original post. He specifically cites Nikkita Oliver’s knowledge of city government policy concerning homelessness as something Seattle’s citizens should respect, admire, and heed.

So, I pointed out, yet again, that Nikkita Oliver had NO knowledge of our city’s homeless policy. None. Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

Therefore, Charles’ angry, bitter, scolding advice to his fellow citizens in this post has as much value as Nikkita Oliver had knowledge: none. Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

Understand now?

Seattle spent billions on a tunnel that everyone but the developers and a council on the take were against. Ultimately that was accepted without a peep of protest. Giveaways to billionaires is expected.

50 million toward the homeless? i agree this is a mostly incompetent and corrupt city hall that will mismanage the money. But most of the protest reeks of contempt at best, and hatred at the extreme, for the weak, along with a cultish devotion to the 'success' of thieves like Bezos. Bezos is worshipped for his wealth of which others are said to be 'jealous', when all he did was follow the Walmart playbook - starve the competition, outlasting all competition through marketing and massive subsidization. Give nothing back. Bezos is Charlie Sheen with a much larger bank account.#winning#