Ignorance of my fellow California's handing out our money out of our wallet is unbelievable you are going to pay for this you know that out of your pocket
What happened to the $100+ Billion Dollar surplus from the Federal COVID Stimulus Bill? Answer: They stole it and squandered it in less than a year to have a multi-$Billion Dollar deficit the very next year.
I voted no on prop 1 and will vote no again in November. Yes the intentions to help people in need but a majority of the time the money goes up in smoke. We have funds for this problem and the needy has increased??????
Anywhere you put money, there will be those who want it. It won't reduce costs. They spend that money increasingly fast and end up having to borrow more from the taxpayers.
Lies! Lies! Lies! Now they are missing $20 billions dollars in past homeless funds!!! You should all have read it yourselves!!! This bond expires 30 years from now at a cost of $300 million dollars (per year) in principle and interest! Lies! Lies! Lies!
Im opposed to giving money to sacramento so they can flush it down the toilet. They need to show taxpayers that they can make rational decisions with the money they already get before i vote to give them more.
Shit, after Regan got rid of the "crazy houses" in the hood we had crazy people just walking the streets, i remember seeing them in the yards of the places one day then it felt like being leo dicaprio on shutter island the next day walking to the store. I understood it and the reasoning as a kid, i could see the set up. It casts a looming distance over everyones peace. You don't really get over the terror of plausible violence, you just grow familiar to the feeling. Seeing the people who really need care and help just projecting the replays of trumas they lived once, it hurts when you empathize. Getting them a place to find peace and work through what they can is paramount. Not being yelled at would be a wholesome byproduct.
San Francisco already spends over $60,000 per year on EACH "homeless" person. Explain to me how this is not enough money to buy each a nice house, pay each a stipend so they can stay stoned to their heart's content, and hire them a personal shrink.
So how do you force these folks into the “beds”? My brother is a drug addict and he won’t be treated unless forced. I don’t hear anything about the mandatory nature of treatment.
They will literally be forced because effective Jan 2025 a change to LPS conservatorship (county becomes guardian/ward) including substance use disorders.
I'm not going to pay for this we already paid for Iraq Afghanistan gave them tons of military equipment now handing billions of dollars for homeless people who are lazy and refused to do anything productive or work
I'm sorry but on everything else that is also, if not more, in need of that money over powers this prop 1. As in, nows not the best time, unfortunately.
Borrow $6.4 Billion for only 10,000 beds. Each bed would cost $640,000. That cant be right
the california way
In California that's the cost of a windowless room, the size of a broom closet, with a single outlet, for one year.
Not just housing , mental & addiction services
You are wrong indeed, you misunderstood the prop badly
It's California "math". 2+2=5
Didn’t work last time instead it got worse. Im voting NO!
Prop 1 is a way to enrich rich people who will milk the 330 million in spending every year.
Exactly
How so?
Voted NO on 1. Budget the money you ALREADY have and cut the high payroll you have on the administrators of social programs.
VOTE NO ON 1
Done deal they think we're stuck on stupid. Any prop that cost money NO it is my friends.
Who keeps falling for these proposition scams???
Not me.
@@Lazymairmaid Good for you, just wish other people were just as smart not to.
Women
The uneducated electorate.
@@niffs75 we're a blue state for a reason...
Ignorance of my fellow California's handing out our money out of our wallet is unbelievable you are going to pay for this you know that out of your pocket
More money down the drain. What happened with the HHH money we voted for? Basically nothing.
What happened to the $100+ Billion Dollar surplus from the Federal COVID Stimulus Bill? Answer: They stole it and squandered it in less than a year to have a multi-$Billion Dollar deficit the very next year.
I voted no on prop 1 and will vote no again in November. Yes the intentions to help people in need but a majority of the time the money goes up in smoke. We have funds for this problem and the needy has increased??????
Anything Gavin Newsom proposes is automatically a "No"
Now I'm voting Yes to negate you
What a waste of Tax payers money
The Guv is trying to sell this (in his ads) as an initiative aimed at military veterans' assistance. It is not.
Prop 1 = TAXES TAXES TAXES 💰💰💰💰💰💰👈
No thanks, nothing good ever come from Gavin. Next governor please.
If Newscom wants it. He must be skimming some off the top
Anywhere you put money, there will be those who want it.
It won't reduce costs. They spend that money increasingly fast and end up having to borrow more from the taxpayers.
'Borrow' money from the taxpayers??? They don't borrow, they take.
Borrow, take, steal......you say potAto, I say potato😂
6 billion or 600 billion any billions we don't have that kind of money
I voted NO
The best way for Newsom to help California is to get out of the way.
Just because homeless vets could always use more aid doesn't mean that Prop 1 is worth it to taxpayers' pockets.
Veterans don’t be fooled by Newsom.
Nobody is talking about that it takes money from existing programs
Changes %, brings more $ = more $ everywhere
This video talked about it
I was looking for this comment
Lies! Lies! Lies!
Now they are missing $20 billions dollars in past homeless funds!!!
You should all have read it yourselves!!!
This bond expires 30 years from now at a cost of $300 million dollars (per year) in principle and interest!
Lies! Lies! Lies!
You should find this missing 62 Billion before you get another penny!
A big NO!
Im opposed to giving money to sacramento so they can flush it down the toilet. They need to show taxpayers that they can make rational decisions with the money they already get before i vote to give them more.
No
Shit, after Regan got rid of the "crazy houses" in the hood we had crazy people just walking the streets, i remember seeing them in the yards of the places one day then it felt like being leo dicaprio on shutter island the next day walking to the store. I understood it and the reasoning as a kid, i could see the set up. It casts a looming distance over everyones peace. You don't really get over the terror of plausible violence, you just grow familiar to the feeling. Seeing the people who really need care and help just projecting the replays of trumas they lived once, it hurts when you empathize. Getting them a place to find peace and work through what they can is paramount. Not being yelled at would be a wholesome byproduct.
San Francisco already spends over $60,000 per year on EACH "homeless" person. Explain to me how this is not enough money to buy each a nice house, pay each a stipend so they can stay stoned to their heart's content, and hire them a personal shrink.
Doubt it
@@rp9674 Well documented. Go look it up.
How much do you think a "nice" house costs?
Do you have any idea how much housing costs in SF?
@@korinoriz Nice compared to a tent. An apartment might be $4k/mo. d'ya think $60k/year would pay for that?
I’m voting No to all props except for Prop 36.
So how do you force these folks into the “beds”? My brother is a drug addict and he won’t be treated unless forced. I don’t hear anything about the mandatory nature of treatment.
There is, that's the source of some opposition. I'm for it
Care Court
@denisevaldez yes, that's it. I think it's necessay.
They will literally be forced because effective Jan 2025 a change to LPS conservatorship (county becomes guardian/ward) including substance use disorders.
Newsome wants it? Frightening
This explains nothing about how it works.
I'm not going to pay for this we already paid for Iraq Afghanistan gave them tons of military equipment now handing billions of dollars for homeless people who are lazy and refused to do anything productive or work
Yes on 1
Naaaa
Every working person who is scraping by to buy gas and go to work and barely can eat should have voted no who could have possibly voted yes
If they don't ant this proposition to pass. It will.
What are they doing with all the money they tax me to death with already? They are gonna do nothing
I'm sorry but on everything else that is also, if not more, in need of that money over powers this prop 1. As in, nows not the best time, unfortunately.
We have voted on a proposal like this years ago. No he wants us to fork over more money? Yeah right.
"Anything Gavin Newsom proposes is automatically a "No"
TRUMP 2024 🇺🇸🇺🇸♥️♥️🇺🇸🇺🇸
Anyone homeless when we've had the best economy for the past 15 years has no excuse. Don't waste any more money on people who will always be homeless.
Addiction & mental illness, not laziness
@@rp9674 you can give them a place to stay in your house. I don't want to see anymore of my tax money wasted on them.
@@mrc5425 sharing my house is not part of the proposition, but I appreciate people who want to help instead of being selfish & greedy.
It's not a waste to help people who have health issues. Though it does matter how you go about it.
More people we help, the less likely we are to have shootings. I voted against prop 1 though, the funding didn't seem quite right
Nope