True, it shouldn’t really be opposed. But there are downsides: the cost would be large; but the bigger problem is that it’s only LA, other states and cities do actively pay for bus tickets to cities in California especially LA, to lessen their own homeless problems. There is a not so slim chance that it will drive more homeless people to LA. This obviously wouldn’t be the case if a similar act was implemented state, or even better nation wide, but as it stands this only affects Los Angeles. Good on the LA government for taking these steps even with the potential downsides to improve the lives of the countless homeless people with no where else to go.

real like long term not real as in there is no benefit. Bad choice of words on my part.

That is the actual reason to oppose this measure. Because it’s less than the minimum needed to work. What real benefit is there to temporarily housing homeless people and then not providing them any other services?

Thanks for your comment, I do appreciate it, and I will check out that youtube channel. But are you telling me that there are failed states in the west? And if so could you name one?

I took this almost word for word from a paper (albeit the introduction). I wasn’t just posting something I heard 20 years ago.

Clearly, there is a conundrum where there is overbuilding and “ghost towns” on the one hand, and where millions of migrants and urban poor lack basic housing on the other hand.

If you took my comment to be anything more than just a kind of statement question hybrid then that’s my bad, but I don’t feel there is need for anything more than a correction.

Erecting an entire city in the middle of nowhere is not a good way to make a city. Cities are like living things in that they have to grow and develop overtime. People won’t choose to move to a city with no one else there on the promise that there will be other people there in the future, you’d have to pay people to live there, either directly or through subsidised living costs. It’s much better to let a city grow naturally over time. It doesn’t need to be much time, a couple decades would probably work, but you have to let it expand naturally.

20% of urban households in China own multiple homes, compared to 13% in the US and 10% in the UK. China suffers from having too much property in some areas where lots of it sit empty and not enough in others where people lack basic housing.

Lame. Let me consume alcohol in peace. I’m simply continuing the ancient human tradition of getting wasted.

Burger and fries $25. Double johnnie walker blue label $53 Outrageous

I swear it only became a news story when it flew over an area with people and it was low enough to be spotted. I could swear that I had read that the government already knew about multiple other weather balloons but just didn’t care or at least didn’t say anything about them. And once people start screaming there’s a spy balloon in the sky you can’t really just leave it alone.

I don’t understand what your ultimate point is? Is it not common knowledge that major powers spy and sabotage each other? And would that not make this news uninteresting?

And you bring up my other comments, but are you trying to argue that Americans are bad at capitalism with my first comment? Americans are undoubtedly the best at capitalism, name one other country that really takes capitalism and sticks to it like it’s the only thing they know how.

You are furious at me and all I have said is that this is not new news to anyone with common sense.

I’m no yank, and is it really news that major country spies on other major country? Allies spy on allies, why would enemies not also spy and sabotage each other?

Should they do this? Probably not. Is it surprising that they do? Not at all.

Wow, what news. US spies on China, China spies on US. I can’t wait to find out if Russia and the US spy on each other, or if North Korea and China spy on each other. Or if (country) spies on (other country).

If I wrote a self help book, it would say, don’t pay for self help books when you can instead read famous amazing books for free instead.

I despise self help books, the money spent on a self help book could instead buy a copy of some classic literature, which will be infinitely more useful and meaningful than “Step 1. make a lotta money, step 2. Sleep 5 hours a day, step 3. Cold shower brrrrr”.

Even better, you can just read a classic book on gutenberg or an ereader for free, and donate the $15-$20 to a charity.

If a full scale war broke out that involved the US taking part, it would be WW3. It seems likely that China would lose at the moment as nothing can compare to the military strength of the US. But it would probably be a tough war that would leave China in a really bad state and the US in a pretty bad state. But then again I know nothing.

Potentially big if true

People haven’t had a chance to vote in a general election since the Boris Johnson stepping down event. I doubt they will make it in next year, I imagine it could be decimation for the Tories

I like your idea, but my opinion is that people hear a lot about capitalism in the news (it feels like it has been showing up more and more in mainstream discussion), and simultaneously feel like their own quality of life has been dropping recently, equate the two and reject the faux capitalism they think is ruining their lives.

It could very well be that capitalism is ruining their life, it could be that the governments in power do not do enough to regulate for their best interests. It could be that they don’t do enough physical activity and so they feel worse.

I would bet that most of those polled chose socialism because it’s not capitalism (which shares a name with an idea they think they dislike) but it’s not as “extreme” as communism (because that’s the bad evil thing!!!).

It could create potential for positive socialist change like you say, but I fear that when people don’t know what they are voting for, they won’t know if it’s being implemented effectively.

deleted by creator