Why Are Tens Of Thousands of Homeless Still Sleeping on the Streets in LA despite spending Billions

Look it up..
https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/california_state_spending.html
$25B to LA - almost half of California's $51.5B in state and local welfare expenditures.

LA is the crown jewel - America's poorest big city...
http://laist.com/2014/09/19/los_angeles_is_the_poorest_of_the_m.php

Thanks Libs!

I hope you don't suck at life the way you suck at math.

LA has a budget bigger than 10 states including many of your red states. If that's poor, what do you call Mississippi?

And what is wrong with CA spending it's own money on it's own citizens? Are they stealing from some other state? Why don't you worry about your own shitholes with meth epidemics and falling living standards instead of concern trolling about world's fifth biggest economy.
 
Your report didn't say anything about cumulative spending, it talked about future billion dollar spending by issuing bonds. There is no evidence to say that LA has already spent billions.

I am just starting to Google search a bit more information about this topic.

imo, Would it be possible that some homeless are mobile and networked to check/know which city would be willing/planning to spend more money soon, then they would try their best to move to the city because the news of spending budget on homeless?

That kind of dynamics would be very hard to resolve even a FIFO registration system is already existing and functioning.

In other words, it is possible that any single city spending more money in homeless would even get further more inflow of homeless on top of the previous figure. (Perhaps a city without any spending/ budget for helping homeless then would naturally have much less homeless.)

Or, we could say it is a national problem/issue, rather than merely a problem/issue of a particular state or city, in today's living environment in terms of mobility (traffic/ transportation/ logistics) and communications (mobile phone/ the internet/ TV news).

I don't know.
 
One is a CFO and the other a IT Consultant worried about Calif Homeless problem while supposedly at work. True beauticians! Bro?

Oh GWB could be real alright. I worked in IT and he would a classic for a "Contractor Steve", the guy who everyone thinks is a muppet but he turns up on time and, well is a known quantity.

You send Steves off to places you don't want to go to do simple shit. They have a lot of time on their hands.

Edited: Thinking about it, guess who was reporting from freezing cold Canada?...
 
I hope you don't suck at life the way you suck at math.

LA has a budget bigger than 10 states including many of your red states. If that's poor, what do you call Mississippi?

And what is wrong with CA spending it's own money on it's own citizens? Are they stealing from some other state? Why don't you worry about your own shitholes with meth epidemics and falling living standards instead of concern trolling about world's fifth biggest economy.

I know I may be wrong, but I do think that logically the homeless in a free country would try their best to move to the cities that shows having a heart in providing resources and in spending good money in helping homeless.

Most likely the whole thing would be a national issue, I would think.

Complaining any particular city for accommodating too many homeless may be simply showing the complaint itself is funny and superficial. lol

Perhaps quite the opposite: These cities should be praised, besides they should be given more federal funding, such as one-to-one matching the state/city's spending.
 
In other words, it is possible that any single city spending more money in homeless would even get further more inflow of homeless on top of the previous figure. (Perhaps a city without any spending/ budget for helping homeless then would naturally have much less homeless.)

This is of course correct.
If you subsidize something - you get more of it.
 
One is a CFO and the other a IT Consultant worried about Calif Homeless problem while supposedly at work. True beauticians! Bro?

And one sits at home alone and is an angry, disheveled "trader" who spends his time doing drive-bys on a political forum while managing to avoid any relevant content whatsoever. Another is hiding from extradition in a south American country, probably for crimes related to minors.
 
Back
Top