Chicago's Radical Solution to End Homelessness

[@prettypuff1]

As born and raised Chicagoan, we need to see some uncorrupted change

[@scorpiocara6798]

What do u think of mayor Lightfoot?

[@frankd.506]

@@scorpiocara6798 She's not mayor any longer.

[@bobriquardo5317]

@@scorpiocara6798 she has beautiful eyes but she's not mayor anymore

[@fallen4life080]

​@@scorpiocara6798She ran on a very progressive platform but ended up not playing fair with citizens, unions, or departments..she betrayed everyone's trust. Brandon Johnson seems to be off to a better start even tho he's snoozing on things

[@brainown3149]

There's more profit in keeping the homeless issue as is. You can't fix the issue by throwing money at it.

[@frankierizzo]

Good luck Chicago, I hope you end up being able to help your people.

[@60015]

"How do we get to more affordable permanent housing?" I think making it legal to build more housing would be a good start!

[@user-rx2ur5el9p]

When the ownership class is angry, that means the working class is close to actually getting a crumb or two for once.

[@katherine.zacheis]

Okay, but what about the people that are homeless currently? There are so many vacant buildings that could be transitioned very quickly.

[@floridaman6982]

These are the best types of taxes because it affects the people who are using the system the most

[@JADiaz10]

Proud of my city for this.

[@matthewsanchez7953]

I'm always happy to hear _"Big corporate land lords are not happy"_

[@ErutaniaRose]

Same! Landlords are just leeches that commodify a basic need. They gotta go.

[@DJ_Force]

Yes, landlords have to go! Of course, without landlords, there is no renting. That mean people who don't qualify for a mortgage are also now homeless. Still, so long as the rich suffer, it's worth it!

[@ohiasdxfcghbljokasdjhnfvaw4ehr]

i dont, because that means they're about to start lobbying and are going to win

[@joleaneshmoleane8358]

You have a pretty simple worldview, huh? Not much room for nuance in there I see.

[@ErutaniaRose]

There really isn't much nuance to see when big corporate landlords are generally bad for the well being of the population. Sure some of them may be nice people, but it doesn't change the fact that their position monetizes a basic need and that a lot of them get mad when people get basic needs and don't suffer for their benefit. People who get mad because others AREN'T suffering are generally shitty people, lol. Last time I checked, they don't actually work either, they are just getting an income by owning property they purchased ONCE and saying "I own this property you need to live, pay me while I don't fix it/update it enough, upcharge you because I can far beyond regular inflation rates, and make people homeless while laughing." I'm not even kidding. There are far more landlords who laugh about kicking out single mothers, than there are the ones who gave rent relief during covid. And no matter how good of a person you are, you should never hold a position where you have the power to take away someone else's basic need. It's just cruel and obviously not necessary in literally the richest nation that has ever existed in human history. @@joleaneshmoleane8358

[@NoName-ik2du]

My initial thought was, "Genius move making the plan _lower_ taxes for regular homes. That'll incentivize people to vote for it even if they don't care about the homeless," but then I realized that's just going to encourage rental companies to gobble up more of the smaller residential properties on the market to dodge the tax. What we _really_ need is there to be a law prohibiting any non-human entity from owning a residential property, period. If corporations and hedge funds buy all the properties, that creates an artificial housing shortage that raises home prices and forces more people into renting, and those people are forced to rent at ridiculous rates because a select few hold an oligopoly on the majority of homes so they can charge whatever they want in rent. It's a vicious cycle that can only be broken with major government intervention that turns homes back into homes instead of assets.

[@alexcarter8807]

This is why 2nd, 3rd, etc homes need to be taxed at 33% of their value per annum.

[@Sleepy7666]

​@@alexcarter8807not even four homes should be taxed like that. It should be 5 and above and you have to disclose any company you have ownership that has housing as assets. Going after a middle class family because they had a primary home and prefabricated home on a lake isn't gonna do anyone good. What if the married couple both lose their parents and acquire multiple houses and you need to do maintenance to sell to pay off their parent's debt?

[@dosadoodle]

> What we really need is there to be a law prohibiting any non-human entity from owning a residential property, period. Something in this direction does seem better at the end goal impact. Could impose a small transfer tax on a property owned by an individual, and if the property is owned by a corporation or LLC, impose a larger transfer tax. Another approach is to increase property taxes on properties owned by corporations / LLCs. Would be nice to provide an option for people who own shares in a single LLC / private corporation to be exempted if their revenue falls below a certain threshold. Of course, this is all just a roundabout way of increasing taxes on the wealthy. This would all be simpler if we raised income taxes on the wealthy, eliminating loopholes like depreciation on a residential property, and raising taxes on capital gains (this last one would deliver the most bang for the buck of these three options).

[@sgrant39]

No, zoning creates housing shortages. Repeat after me Zoning creates housing shortages. Corporations can buy (and often build) tons of housing properties but if Zoning Laws allow additional units to be built they is enough supply. Banning corporations from owning and therefore building housing will lead to a massive housing shortage.

[@lorenam8028]

China does it quite well: a few years back they implement a law that says: A) only private people can own residential units B) No more than 3 per person Worked like a charm.

[@curiousgemini]

Many homeless people work for a living but have been priced out of having an affordable place to stay.

[@chatsagain]

Yes. Realpage is being sued for price fixing. I hope and pray the courts rule against their price fixing. Realpage used an algorithm to set rental prices high and then they "enforced" to ensure their members were compliant. They are all across the US.

[@Gormadt]

Yup, during the decade I was homeless I was working the whole time. Unfortunately it was for minimum wage so definitely not gainfully employed. And the number of my coworkers that were some flavor of homeless as well would have shocked most people.

[@EternalResonance]

It's not homelessness, most of it is due to Dr0ug problems, mental disabilities and lack of psychological help/counseling. Housing them won't solve the core issue. They need help to learn how to care about themselves, many of them never had real care, love or family members.

[@EternalResonance]

It's not homelessness, most of it is due to Dr0ug problems, mental disabilities and lack of psychological help/counseling. Housing them won't solve the core issue. They need help to learn how to care about themselves, many of them never had real care, love or family members.

[@bingbong9844]

I was homeless in Chicago for a year and a half until this last September. Chicago has some of the most helpful, well funded homeless programs in the country. If you take advantage of these programs you will get help. I now have my own studio apartment (Single Occupancy)

[@sillygo0oser]

That’s amazing!! Congratulations. Do you still live in chicago?

[@nonya.bizness]

💙 happy for you.

[@EternalResonance]

It's not homelessness, most of it is due to Dr0ug problems, mental disabilities and lack of psychological help/counseling. Housing them won't solve the core issue. They need help to learn how to care about themselves, many of them never had real care, love or family members.

[@angle5520]

When corporate loses their shit, you know it's citizen centered.

[@Monkehrawrrr]

They ganna fight this with everything they got

[@acacacacacacaccaca7666]

Coming next companies and stores leave Chicago, unemployment crysis

[@space.youtube]

@@acacacacacacaccaca7666I disagree with you but find it interesting that you concede the coercive nature of america's economic paradigm, and the influence capital exerts on governments and populations. This certainly is "the way it is" but it doesn't have to be. Poverty and homelessness are policy decisions that can be changed when people recognise what's truly in their own interests, and vote accordingly.

[@DemPilafian]

@@space.youtube Doing meth and fentanyl is a "policy decision"? Interesting.

[@Jx493]

I completely and totally agree with your sentiment, but if you could find a more class conscious way to phrase what you're saying I think you could do a lot more good for everyone who hears you.

[@peachyjam9440]

Don't call it "radical" when it's a 1-2% tax increase for millionaires homes, that's the least radical solution to anything I've ever seen in my life

[@tedr4526]

I mean, like a small contribution could potentially help a lot of people. I felt that if I was that wealthy, I would be like who cares great. that’s how these people are. They just scrounge for every nickel and penny and don’t want to give anything up even if it may help a bunch of people.

[@PureMagma]

The mistake in what you're saying is that someone buying a home for a million dollars makes them a millionaire. It absolutely does not mean that at all. Home mortgages are amortized over a 30 yr period. Someone who only makes $300k annually can finance a million dollar home and it's INSANE to expect people to finance a 2 or 3 percent fee because it become SO MUCH MORE MONEY that buyers will be stuck paying over the life of a loan. This is yet another way to punish the middle class who is desperately hanging on by their teeth while paying the lion's share of all the debts in the US.

[@MajorHickE]

​@@PureMagma "only $300k annually" Do you hear yourself ever. At all. That's the medium income of the entire US in like 3 months. If you can't figure out how to live on that cut down on the fuckin lattes

[@lIIIIlIllI]

@@PureMagmaare you being serious?

[@supernova622]

On what fuckin planet is $300k/year "middle class" 😂😂

[@christophercelmer405]

That is half the solution. The other half is regulations to stop capital owners from scooping up these properties and jacking up the prices for them again or from turning them into rental units.

[@Volkbrecht]

Especially foreign capital. After learning how Switzerland manages things it became kind of weird to me how other countries, among them my own, allow for foreign investors to buy up the one thing that is finite in supply. The Swiss will have you wait for several years, even if you live and work there, before you are allowed to purchase a home.

[@angelasylvain2476]

100% agree. May I add, and manipulating the market by buying up huge swaths of neighborhoods but sitting on properties to push the cost up.

[@drewmorrison]

@@angelasylvain2476for sure. I’m not in the agreement of “banning” foreign capital but they should have to pay an extra fee or fine to discourage these practices. Make sure it costs them more to sit on a property than it would to wait for the value to skyrocket.

[@honestfriend767]

Exactly thank you. Democrat solutions are always about raising taxes which the price get passed on to renters to pay. The root of the problem is corporations owning homes simply stoping them from doing that will settle the housing issue, no one will get hurt but corporations with this solution. Why can’t they ever push for a solution that doesn’t involve taxes.

[@JosedeJezeus]

🎯

[@MayaUndefined]

if the corporate landlords are against it, I'm for it.

[@P1nstr1p3]

The lady at the end is a wonderful voice of reason. “Tax break? Hallelujah.” This is an actual middle class/upper middle class person who would meaningfully benefit, who also wants the best for their fellow man.

[@lohphat]

Finland addressed it in two years. Get people into housing FIRST, not last. Once they're in housing the things which made them homeless are less of a pressure and people can climb out. Our Housing LAST policy is cruel, forcing broken lives to perform like circus animals to earn housing.

[@colorbugoriginals4457]

Exactly. In so many cases in the US the opposition really seems to come down to plain spite. "I had to work for my home, don't give homeless people homes if they didn't do what i did!" i mean.

[@karlabritfeld7104]

Rich people in this country are nasty to poor folks who didn't inherit wealth like they did

[@KCH55]

It's a little bit more complicated to be able to implement it. But yes, ideally housing first. Finland owns a bit of the land, another thing that would happen here cuz it would absolutely happen here, because we already have a problem of this is city to city, county to county, state to state bus, and even fly there homeless, diverting their responsibility. So as soon as you have something like that it will become a magnet, and a project that could have been feasible will end up becoming unfeasible, simply due to the geographical conditions we have. I have personally thought about this and I think it would be lovely but you would have to have some very strict rules about it. For one thing you should have to have proof of residency for several years, work, or proof of birth( lets at say at city). Number 2 is that trying to reconnect the homeless to their families, while receiving short-term shelter. Especially if they are not from the said area that is providing the resources. Number 3 finding permanent housing solutions for the long term for those who qualify. The best solution of the course would be if it was done on a national basis, but we know how that goes. It probably wouldn't happen but there you go. Personally, I would at least like it to be that states/cities have a personal responsibility to dealing with their own residents, instead of diverting their responsibilities onto other places like they do.

[@alejohernandez75]

The entire country of Finland has a population smaller than the city of New York. They were able to take funds from their state carbon fuel exports and subsidize a couple thousand people out of homelessness. The number of people who get housing assistance in the US is close to the population of the whole country of Finland.

[@futurethinking]

@@alejohernandez75 This argument has always been tried and it doesn't make any less stupid. The country of Finland have less homeless and but also less people so burden on individuals can be more or less than USA based on ratio of homeless/population, scale doesn't make social programs inheritably more or less complicated

[@timetowakeup6302]

Over 70% of Americans are currently living check to check. With rising inflation and cost of living along with stagnating wages, sadly homelessness will only continue to worsen as it has for the past 15 years. Meanwhile 60 corporations paid a combined $0 in federal taxes on their profits last year. Greedy corporations and crooked politicians got us here.

[@bobriquardo5317]

more homeless today than the Great Depression. This is the worst it has ever been.

[@Vorasii]

i mean whats the problem with investor profits rising 10% year over year? middle class and lower get the shit end of the stick

[@justjunkmale]

And most homeless data points don't include people who are in long stay motels or couch surfing, so the numbers are higher than we even know.

[@anonimanonimov3251]

Hmm... But why don't Americans just elect honest politicians who will solve their domestic problems by turning greedy corporations into innovative businesses? Isn't the USA a democracy? So why year after year, decade after decade, century after century there are always crooked politicians and greedy corporations? I can't find any other explanation than that the American people just want things to stay the way they are. For example, the US always preached my country to be more democratic while we had 0% unemployment or homelessness. But as the democratic institutions in my country start to develop under the strong guidance of the US, we begin to have these things. So it turns out that people everywhere, deep down, just want to be homeless. There is just no other logical explanation that I can think of.

[@ErutaniaRose]

For real. This is a prime example of why capitalism doesn’t work. Commodifying basic needs is a horrible idea, especially in this day and age with our current knowledge, infrastructure, and resources.

[@Soviet_Kitty]

5:28 investors have never been and never will be the “key to providing affordable housing”, all they do is scalp supply lmao

[@acacacacacacaccaca7666]

How about when they started building really tiny apartment to shove a ton of people into one building

[@blehhleb]

​@@acacacacacacaccaca7666 THAT'S WHAT I WANT. I have no problem living in a studio. Zoning doesn't allow it and continues to flood the market with single family units, $2400 a month.

[@acacacacacacaccaca7666]

@@blehhleb you will live in the studio and you will pay 2400 a month for it

[@jasonlacroix6083]

Warren Buffet told us years ago, "so long as they can still make a percentage point or two, they'll pay it.".

[@erinmac4750]

​@@acacacacacacaccaca7666 Yep. That's what their doing, as well as dividing up single family homes to rent by the room. Corporate investors/investment groups need to be out of the residential market. Housing should not be a Wall Street commodity (neither should water).

[@wildestthornberry3349]

This problem is everywhere, not just in the city. Private equity firms and slumlords are buying up all the residential properties. I moved almost 50 miles west of Chicago to find barely affordable housing, and they jack up the rent every year. One guy owns half the residential properties in this town and the mayor owns a real estate company. This has to stop. The only real way a normal person can build any kind of wealth to retire on in this country is through owning property. I am so tired of getting screwed around by slum lords and their unscrupulous property managers. There's little to no legal recourse when they screw tenants. I suppose we could try to get our congress to do something about it but that will never go anywhere and homeless people don't have the time. I vote for the torch and pitchfork option.

[@EternalResonance]

It's not homelessness, most of it is due to Dr0ug problems, mental disabilities and lack of psychological help/counseling. Housing them won't solve the core issue. They need help to learn how to care about themselves, many of them never had real care, love or family members.

[@ldawg7117]

The thought that anyone working/has a job is homeless, is utterly bewildering, as is.. it's objectively inexcusable and unacceptable that there's people out there working TWO fucking jobs, and STILL homeless. Hell, I say that, but it's unacceptable for anyone to be homeless, really.

[@KesSharann]

In the US it's around half. Half of homeless people have jobs but cannot afford housing of any sort.

[@acacacacacacaccaca7666]

Get a third job problem solved

[@ldawg7117]

@@acacacacacacaccaca7666 🤣

[@ldawg7117]

@@KesSharann yeah, I learned that a while back, couldn't believe that shit. I make sure to mention that any and every time I hear some far-right ass saying they should just get a job and that they're just lazy. Of course, they always just ignore it, or claimed that the statistics were fabricated by the 'woke media' for their woke agenda or some shit🙄.

[@anthonydowney-uo2zo]

I work full time and homeless in California . What's crazy is CA spends so much yearly to fight homelessness it actually be cheaper to buy every homeless person a 30k house. I mean like way cheaper . Most programs and shelters are crap beggars can't be choosers but when you know how much is being donated you know for a fact they are miss allocating funds and alot goes to wages of staff. And then showers don't work PBJ for dinner everything's broken or dirty and it's like on public record the foundation made millions last year its like obviously people's are taking the money. No on really monitors how money is spent in shelters or programs its just a money bag. Then someone with out a college degree has the balls to tell you you don't know how to manage money. Also alot of people called " social workers " have literally 0 education one of my social workers made 70k a year didn't even graduate high-school Its like insane and they are giving life advice to people while blaring rap and smoking weed . .. I could technically not be homeless but rent is so high I'd spend about 80% of my monthly income on rent which is financially a horrible investment and also it be extremely difficult to find a person to rent to me but i make enough where i could rent maybe a room off craigslist but I need to save for retirement, medical expenses, emergencies which I guess is now a luxury??

[@kakumee]

They also need options for people who are disabled and can't work or who take care of disabled family. You can't get an "affordable" place on something like ssi where you get around $900 a month when "affordable" housing is $900+ a month. Some places will even charge you $900 per person living there, on top of having 2-3 xs the rent!! For some people living in a shelter or living with strangers isn't an option.

[@Butte_r]

This is what California should be proposing!

[@charlierodriguez8489]

Unfortunately rich people control government here, many of them ar3 also part of government and won't allow it on the ballot.

[@blubase06]

nope. newsom is too busy being corrupt and bending over backwards for the resniks

[@stickynorth]

EVERYWHERE should be proposing... A national tax standard...

[@triaxe-mmb]

I don't mind this plan so far - but the brackets should be adjusted for market price change every 5yrs or something....otherwise in 20yrs all the homes might be over 1M like places like in most of the Bay Area...

[@silverXnoise]

You can easily crunch some back-of-the-envelope numbers and come up with the fairly simple fact that America could end homelessness nationwide *today* by spending less than the budget for *just air conditioning* at Afghanistan militarily bases. It’s not that we can’t do it. We just don’t want to.

[@jonsnowver4183]

If you're watching this months after the vote and want to know the outcome, it failed.

[@lynnmillard1666]

I live in a mfg home community in Davie Florida Being self employed, I chose this property in 2019, 1st as a rental which I later purchased for 30K, the Lot lease for the long time owner was under $800, once it sold, ELS has raised my lot lease annually and as of May 2024 I will begin to pay $1,323.07 I wrote a letter to one of my state politicians and received back a response that basically brushed me off. This home is old and unhealthy but it’s all I can afford and I can’t afford the repairs to make it safe for me and my 2 cats. The system pushes us down. For people like me there isn’t a hopeful end on the horizon. The rich get richer and the poor are the stepping blocks to their wealth.

[@paintedwings74]

You nailed it. Your situation is all too close to homelessness, and it's a lot of stress because you know there's basically no buffer between you and rock-bottom, as is true for far too many people in the USA. Not your fault, but who gets the blame when people like you and me get into deeper and deeper poverty? We get the blame, because that's who politicians and corporations WANT to take the blame.

[@JulianaBlewett]

That's why unless you own your own land, you should never buy a trailer on somebody else's lot. Because when you factor in what you're paying for the trailer and then you factor in the lot rent you're paying more than you would for a house. I'm in a house that we bought in 1992 on 3/4 of an acre. The house is a three-bedroom two bath 1600 square foot home and our mortgage payment is $520 a month.

[@SquirtlePWN]

As a realtor I don't get how any realtor could be opposed to this. It makes housing more affordable to those who need it, and more expensive on people with gross excess. Together those forces will help balance out a tumultuous real estate market and shift supply and demand towards the center. That's called a healthy market.

[@raybod1775]

Chicago subsidizing small affordable home for middle class would be a real solution.

[@GoogleMe-en9sg]

How do you explain many cities don't have a transfer tax. They don't have the high property taxes. Chicago spent over $200 million on migrants and the homeless get virtually nothing. The money is there. It's going to the friends of the governor and mayor.

[@junktrunk909]

This wouldn't have done anything about supply or demand. What are you talking about? It might have subsidized some units to make them "affordable" but that's not solving any problem long term, and even that much is unknown because they never bothered to commit to a real plan that would be legally restricted to prevent the usual abuses of routing tax dollars to someone's new stupid project down the road.

[@halberderdier8073]

Less homeless on the streets would long-term improve the image and quality of life in the city leading to higher real estate value.

[@rwoodward8839]

Housing should be free to anyone that wants it and in fact, everything should be free. You're 2.5% commission can stay the same but 2.5% of zero is still zero so who cares?

[@YourCapyFrenBigly_3DPipes1999]

Corporate landlordship should be hugely aggressively controlled and limited in this country in every way. To do otherwise only brings us to where we are now.

[@lisa5249]

We need a greater control over everything in the us, letting capitalism have its way with every sector has brought us where we are today. We can still make profits, but we need to ensure taxes are collected effectively and used for the public good!!!

[@YourCapyFrenBigly_3DPipes1999]

@@lisa5249 well that plus more private sector control in my opinion but yes. 100%

[@Joce123]

There should be a cap on how much money trades people can charge a landlord and how much money repair supplies can be charged to a landlord and how much insurance. increases can be charged to a landlord and how much property taxes can be charged to a landlord...

[@YourCapyFrenBigly_3DPipes1999]

@@Joce123 holy cow why are you stanning for landlords? Are you one? There's a difference between expecting LLs to operate at a loss and controlling the excessive profiteering. Are you a LL? I'm not saying it has to be either or. Everyone has the right to afford a roof, a most basic human need, and private providers have a right to make a reasonable profit. But where do we draw the line between reasonable profit and extreme profit? How do you expect to end homelessness if 60% of people cannot afford the current rates being demanded? Local authorities could just leave the tent cities alone after all they're not doing anything good by just treating them like animals, that shouldn't be allowed either. That's completely unethical. So either we commit to housing everybody who wants a permanent address or we commit to accepting the fact that tent cities are the new normal. You know, like under the Depression. Which would you prefer? And what is your plan?

[@Weldedhodag]

@@lisa5249 we need to reverse the supreme court decision that classifies corporations as 'people' when political campaign donations are concerned. that way politicians could actually get in trouble for accepting bribes.

[@ittixen]

Fuck yeah. You can see the fear in their eyes as they desperately try to convince us this isn't 100% good.

[@DemPilafian]

Fuck yeah. Free money for everyone!

[@tuckerbugeater]

Blockchain will fix it and a surveillance state

[@ittixen]

@@DemPilafian Um. What? I think it's trying to communicate. 🙊

[@hamburglar83]

Nothing i ever 100%, this will trickle down to the consumer and renters. Go walk down state street and Michigan avenue. It’s already 30-60% vacant,

[@HiDefHDMusic]

@@DemPilafiancapitalism is literally “free money if you have money” 😂

[@joeking2850]

93% taxes lowered compared to slight increase tax for corporate overlords plus it helps solve a huge social issue. Sign me up!

[@henryhomes]

I seriously doubt that the landlord with a six-unit property will be selling their building for less than 1M in Chicago.

[@lukasfrykas7188]

oh no, someone might not be able to buy their fifth Belenciaga bag if this passes!

[@SgtJoeSmith]

how about we take profits from Belenciaga then? They only need $5 a bag not $2000.

[@lukasfrykas7188]

#nationalizeBalenciaga@@SgtJoeSmith

[@michealklee8844]

Private equity is at fault make them pay

[@lisa5249]

Privatization is the root of many of our national woes

[@furinick]

Landowners are the biggest leeches, I'm not american but my city in brazil has a problem, a lot of neighbourhoods have empty lots that lazy locals use as trash dumps, those empty lots become breeding grounds for mosquitos, snakes, scorpions etc. Those lots are owned by speculators, I lived for 20 years and there are lots that are surrounded by development, so their land gains value while they don't only not contribute but also take away value, not from jus land but endangering locals with several disease carrying pests They dont even cut their grass, nor fence it off or allow community gardens, they just put up a sign saying not to dump trash

[@jasonlacroix6083]

​@@furinickif the lot isn't developed in a certain time frame, it's deeded to a fund for community improvement. We have properties around in Florida that are land banked the same way. There is one particular that has a structure on it, but has remained untouched for 30 years. They have paid more taxes in 30 years than it's currently worth.

[@TinaMcCall.]

The power class is afraid of the one-way money train stopping. Capitalism is not the best we can do. We have the money and resources RIGHT NOW to provide for basic necessities (housing, food, healthcare, education, internet, utilities, etc.) if we taxed corporations and cut our near $900billion military budget in half. Those who want more can work towards it in safety and ease bc they aren't threatened with living on the street. And fret not for the billionaires (of which you will never be). Even paying their fair corporate taxes, they'd STILL have centuries' worth of generational wealth. As for our political system, we have neither a democracy NOR a republic here in the good old USA. We have political theater. We have a corporate kleptocracy where CORPORATIONS are people: "people" whose lobbying and donation power give them control of our system of supposed checks and balances; "people" who don't pay taxes, who pollute the environment, and who won't pay a living wage. We can do better, and Chicago will hopefully be a start.

[@charvisaur4184]

preach~

[@TinaMcCall.]

@@charvisaur4184 ❤️

[@SgtJoeSmith]

the poor stopped the 2 way train. we want to give the money back to you but you wont come get it!

[@TinaMcCall.]

P.S. - Consider not feeding the trolls like @SgtJoeSmith who will, no doubt, attempt to refute what I'm saying. They're either woefully ignorant (which is not a crime; they could read 2009's Capitalist Realism by Mark Fisher to alleviate that condition); willful deniers, or unpaid lackeys.

[@ErutaniaRose]

I could not agree with you more. 💚

[@nunofyrbusiness8576]

Abject greed once again. How much money does anyone really need. Shame on all the greedy people who choose not to help their fellow man

[@theflexitech]

My friend started studying law 6 years ago, he decided the best course of action was to get into cheap affordable home building, because our country was headed for homeless epidemic. He got ran over in a parking lot working a double 16 lol. I swear, people that decide to try and help and do better, they just die. It's really hard to fight the normal course of things alone or in small groups, takes unity and organization imo.

[@frankguy6843]

There's a reason union membership is near an all time low at the same time homeless is near an all time high

[@AudibleFist]

I hope this gets put in place

[@georgH]

How is it possible that people working 2 jobs are homeless? That's insane, the minimum salary should be enough to have a decent life.

[@nuppyup]

Many jobs are not full time allowing the employers to avoid paying for benefits.

[@lucidragon5260]

Even full time jobs don't guarantee enough money, and you can't live off of benefits. I know some people who work two jobs - one of them offers really low pay but great benefits, the other offers higher pay to help get enough money to afford living

[@veganpundit1]

Seems like a reasonable and sustainable plan!

[@feilin-g9d]

Rent gone increase good luck

[@TheDeviantSaint]

Unfortunately, it failed with 53% voting no.

[@seriouslypagan6904]

A living wage would help.

[@NirvanaFan5000]

surprisingly, it'd actually make things worse: if people have more money but the supply of homes hasn't increased, that will lead to increased housing prices. unhoused people who typically make less than housed people will be even harder pressed to afford a home. (plus increasing housing prices leads to inflation.) ... anyways, i'm not trying to attack you, lol... we also need a living wage, but I keep telling everyone that housing needs to come first or it'll backfire

[@TheXavixavieri]

5:26, yeah dude "small and middle" investors for sure who buy houses at >1 million dollar, yeah. There should be limits to number of homes one can buy as well, with increasing tax with increasig number of homes bought. Otherwise the large companies/rich people would just buy out the cheaper homes because of lower taxes.

[@prophetzarquon1922]

The backbends I've seen attempted, to invent some reason why it isn't a good idea, "would be funny, if it weren't so sad"

[@resolutionarybeing1885]

Sounds good and responsible. Land as well. Some some elites are buying up our farmland and much more around the world--whatever they can get buy with.

[@neiljohnson6815]

Communist much?

[@prophetzarquon1922]

@@neiljohnson6815 You say that like it's a bad thing. That word doesn't mean what you seem to think it means

[@prophetzarquon1922]

@@neiljohnson6815 You say that like it's a bad thing. That word doesn't mean what you seem to think it means

[@bunyipdragon9499]

Well if big corporations don't want it then it must be good for the people.

[@Lanewreck]

Nah, rich people who pay less taxes than the rest of us could end homelessness, but they gotta have that 3rd home and 2 yacht this quarter, not next quarter.

[@quarantainment293]

There's actually a lot of cheap housing in Chicago that is ripe for repair. The issue is safety. Think Austin (right next to affluent Oak Park) even Englewood. You can get properties there dirt cheap, but you might get shot at when you fo to fix up. The next issue is these small cities that will give you a giant hassle when trying get or close out permits. The real question but answered is how is the money going to actually be spent? 75% will probably end up in a politician's pocket or friend etc.

[@ohjonash]

$100 million!!! For just taxing 2-3% on 7% of sales! That’s insane to think about. So many amazing things could be done to help homelessness. And all these talking heads talking about investors and high rises? That’s more important than people living on the streets? Smh.

[@guyserious2468]

Does this encourage more homeless people to move to Chicago for free housing?

[@ohjonash]

@@guyserious2468well if they get free housing they won’t be homeless, which means they can get jobs and sign up for benefits that will lift them out of poverty… idk what your comment was supposed to be but I’d rather see people taken care of rather than taken advantage of so that corporations that are treated like people can build more ugly high rises downtown

[@melreslor2114]

As much as $100M is, it will only put a dent on reducing homelessness in a city the size of Chicago. A noticeable dent, but that's all - unless there is some innovative development such as tiny house villages where the money goes much further.

[@noonecaresaboutgoogle3219]

It's not a smart way to tax property. It discourages older people with larger homes from downsizing, lowering housing supply. A monthly tax on land makes more sense.

[@linus6718]

@@noonecaresaboutgoogle3219 I think we need better data on how much downsizing is a crucial part of housing supply. Unless downsizers are literally the backbone of opening up housing opportunities, I doubt discouraging them is going to outweigh the pros to this plan

[@BladeoftheImmortal2005]

For the $2 billion they spent to try and not get this to pass they could have just housed all the homeless.

[@Theweirdcousin]

Well, that would make too much sense…😏

[@mycollegeshirt]

Yeah that's crazy

[@hopefloats7573]

$2 million not $2 billion

[@BladeoftheImmortal2005]

@@hopefloats7573 ah, they said billion in the video.

[@thefunklenbgamerextraordin6144]

@@BladeoftheImmortal2005 No, they said million. 8:01

[@Ottotherepoman1]

Up here in supposedly socialist canada, a landlord just threw out marginalized people out of an apartment building, with ZERO notice, offered them a few hundred bucks, and had goons throw their belongings out.

[@lacybookworm5039]

This could be a viable solution.

[@HesterPrynne293]

Agreed! I hope it’s implemented. We have to try something…

[@erikawwad7653]

they could build 1000 units of social housing per year

[@feilin-g9d]

@@HesterPrynne293nope not at all. An average 3 unit apartment in pilsen is 1mil. Now you living in unit 1 rent will increase from 1500 to 2500.

[@crimson4066]

This video is clickbait. There is nothing radical about updating a property tax. It's not groundbreaking. It makes no mention of homelessness. It makes no mention of shelter accessibility. None. Bring Chicago Home is fine and dandy if you're looking to buy a home AND you have an above average income WITH above average savings, but it's completely worthless if you're actually in need of a home. Chicago spends $2,000,000,000 (2 billion USD) on police every year and only 1% of that on helping the homeless. It's also 50% of our education budget. Homelessness is a policy choice, but the one being promoted in this video has nothing to do with it. More Perfect Union is really giving Buzzfeed and 5 Minute Crafts vibes.

[@raybod1775]

Then nobody will build homes in 5 years because all new homes will be over a million dollars.

[@moosesandmeese969]

This is not too different from what the Social Democratic Party of Vienna introduced when they won their first city wide election. It's essentially a tax on the rich to fund housing the poor, and this model was so successful that it has not been repealed since, and Vienna is still one of the most affordable major cities in Europe. The only thing missing in Chicago's bill is funding for more social housing.

[@HiDefHDMusic]

The government should be required to build housing in proportion with private capital if it’s going to exist as a form of profit market at all

[@alphaomega1351]

Most people's lives are being ruined by financial capitalism. There are plenty of empty homes 🏡 that are highly inflated. We don't have a homeless issue. We have a reasonable affordable issue. 😳

[@timothymcgovern7279]

Holy crap, they actually lowered the taxes on anything I'd buy. Chi Ca Go, Chi Ca Go!

[@wildfire9280]

Shouldn’t the burden of this taxation fall on landlords and homeowners rather than homebuyers?

[@illiiilli24601]

Yeah this. A progressive Land Value Tax would put the tax on landlords as opposed to homebuyers

[@paulallen2680]

@@illiiilli24601nice to see a fellow land value tax supporter

[@ThisIsYou36]

TAX THE RICH!!

[@zentierra7803]

AND THE CORPORATIONS!!

[@kevingaddis7276]

No call the poor.

[@kyles2232]

​@zentierra7803 You do realize tons of super small businesses are incorporated in some way right??

[@blehhleb]

​@@kyles2232incorporation is a method to evade liability. Make business owners responsible for their own actions again.

[@rwoodward8839]

Look around the world. USA is the richest country. That makes YOU the rich. I agree. Tax you, not me.

[@user-gs6fq1jq8y]

To many people are making money off homelessness...To end homelessness...

[@rwoodward8839]

... and that's the problem. Playing Robin Hood never truly helped anyone except Robin Hood himself. I bet Robin Hood never went hungry.

[@jacksonmagas9698]

We need this, and we need cities around the country to take a look at Vienna and emulate their non-market housing model

[@crimson4066]

Bring Chicago Home is fine and dandy if you're looking to buy a home AND you have an above average income WITH above average savings. It's completely worthless if you're actually in need of a home. This video was clickbait. It will not end homelessness at all. Chicago spends $2,000,000,000 (2 billion USD) on police every year and only 1% of that on helping the homeless. It's also 50% of our education budget. Homelessness is a policy choice, but the one being promoted in this video has nothing to do with it. More Perfect Union is really giving Buzzfeed and 5 Minute Crafts vibes.

[@ScottGerke]

Big corporate has both helped and destroyed America. The government absolutely needs to step in and tax those making massive profits off the real estate market. Though, because they are more concerned about their bottom line, the renters will see their monthly rent go up and the cost of living will go up and we’ll just be back at where we started from. It’s a vicious cycle.

[@michaelthethird702]

Imagine what good the nearly $2,000,000 could have done on this issue instead of fighting against this initiative.

[@TinaMcCall.]

Let's f*ckin GO!

[@marthajean50]

You'd think these investors would realize there's a connection between homelessness and their property values. You pay either way -- might as well pay the way that solves the problem.

[@stickynorth]

In the same situation as I type, crashing on someone's living room. Even with a Bachelor's Degree, you'll still end up homeless in the new economy living on a dirty mattress on the floor... If you're lucky! If this doesn't pass there is something fundamentally wrong with society. Period.

[@pfifo_fast]

I dont have a college degree and make more in construction than all of my peers... You must want to be homeless its too easy to make a fat paycheck this day and age.

[@yyyuiu5773]

skills>degree

[@DarknessWolf-g3h]

It passed in Los Angeles and did not work out well. When commercial sales prices and volume drop, you'll see what a good plan it was. Real Estate is not as simple as they make it sound.

[@daltonzoletta]

5:25 What a load of sheet. Investors are not the key to providing affordable housing, they are why housing is unaffordable. If it was illegal to buy up dozens of properties and build a slumlord empire where you set rent at double the price of the mortgage + property taxes, there wouldn't be a housing crisis. Being able to buy homes you aren't even living in is literally what drives the price of the homes up, there is no more supply plus a huge "investment" demand, prices skyrocket, rents increase, maintenance of properties goes down, eventually you are paying $1500 a month for the cheapest rental in town - a 400 sq ft "studio apartment" that is actually just half of a house that they split apart using thin fiberboard walls. Feeling curious, you pull up the property records and find the last major property improvement happened in 1999 (a new roof). Meanwhile, the foundation is crumbling, there are areas of safety concern that are simply "taped off" with caution tape instead of being repaired, the shingles on the roof are half missing, water drips down your interior walls when it rains, there is black mold present, none of the major appliances work, you smell a gas leak occasionally (but cannot figure out where it is coming from), your front door is a repurposed interior door that doesn't properly fit the doorframe and does nothing to keep heat inside, and you can't do anything about it, they won't fix anything, reporting them will cause them to evict you, and to add insult to injury - you don't have money for a lawyer because they have been taking more than half of your income in rent every month. The house was last sold for $40,000, 30 years ago, property taxes were at $1000/year then and have gradually increased to $3500/year. After doing the math on rent and taxes you realize the owner has profited over half a million dollars in that 30 year timeframe. Half a million dollars profit on a $40,000 house, or an average of ~$16,700 PROFIT per year which is 42% of the original investment... *yearly*. All of that money just for exploiting less fortunate people on a basic human need - shelter. If they had not done that, someone would have been able to afford to buy the home, live there, actually take care of it, be a positive part of the community. When people complain about how trashy "urban" areas are, they seem to not realize that not having ownership of your home simply because someone else bought it to exploit you through rent make the occupants pretty apathetic to caring for it. It is dehumanizing to be essentially forced to live in a property that is falling apart, with a landlord who refuses to do any maintenance, while continuing to pad his bank account with your hard work. I often hear the argument, "No one would do that, property is an investment and letting it fall apart would be bad." I argue that maintenance doesn't matter because they are making the original cost of the house in profit per year. Even if the properties are condemned after 2 years, you would have doubled your investment, so why would you pay to maintain anything?! Bonus points when you are wealthy enough to buy most of the properties in a section of town, because you can run that whole part of town into the ground, lowering the values of the neighboring properties, which you can then buy to continue gaining rental income after the original properties start being condemned. If you own investment rental properties, go F yourself. I'm sick of hearing the "altruistic landlord" fairytale bs, the only reason to buy additional rental property is to screw everyone else out of home ownership. Period.

[@noonecaresaboutgoogle3219]

The root of the problem is not building enough new housing to meet demand because of nimbyism. Everything else is a symptom of that.

[@MasonPruitt-j1y]

it’s more BS! They need to lower their property taxes so more property can afford a home. is so expensive to live in chicago because there is a million ways for the city to take your money

[@kimwilliams388]

All cities facing increased homelessness should consider doing something like Bring Chicago Home

[@crimson4066]

There is nothing radical about updating a property tax policy. It's not groundbreaking. It won't end homelessness. Not in the slightest. The only thing this bill does is make homes slightly cheaper for the majority and a little more expensive for the rich. It doesn't guarantee shelter. It doesn't actually mention anything about accessibility. More Perfect Union is cooking a crock of sh*t by with this garbage. Bring Chicago Home is fine and dandy if you're looking to buy a home AND you have an above average income WITH above average savings. It's completely worthless if you're actually in need of a home.

[@cencent2189]

They should definitely do it! But it's not the only solution, there needs to be more. I work with homelessness in Indianapolis, and what I've found is that most people need mental health help, along with help finding housing. A lot of them, if you gave them easier housing, then they'd lose it due to being exploited, lack of support, and because it is a giant change for most. The price of housing is one aspect, but there are more things that affect them.

[@cencent2189]

@BeerMoneyforTokyo Yeah, there is a lack of mental health support. But I'm just saying from my experience working in mental health and homelessness what is needed.

[@paintedwings74]

Absolutely. It's a good start to solving a very solvable problem.

[@paintedwings74]

@@cencent2189 "If you give them easier housing" is not a solution, because the pressure is still on them to magically solve all of their problems quickly enough to maintain that housing. They need a place that is theirs, paid for for as long as it takes until they can pay for it themselves, not conditional. The solution is Housing First, where people are housed, permanently, with no strings attached and with wrap-around support to help with the issues that stand in the way of people's health, well-being, and potential independence. If you give people housing that they CANNOT lose, then they don't lose it and they have a chance to work on all the other struggles they have in their lives. Every single problem, from disabilities to drug addiction to poverty, is easier to tackle when they're not scared of being harassed by police, beaten up by strangers, having all their property stolen, or just plain being stressed by extremes of heat, cold, mosquitoes, rain, and snow. *The idea is to not blame the individual who has ended up homeless, but to put the blame on the failures of our society that have created their situation.* We're trained by our culture to blame the victim: homeless people must have done something wrong to get there, and they're the ones who must solve their own problems. NO, it's housing costs, loss of protections for tenants, the fact that people still can't afford medical care and can go bankrupt due to accidents or illnesses, stagnant wages, loss of any social safety net, especially for single adults. Drug addicts have been looked at the same way, but that's starting to change after it was revealed that our towns and cities were being flooded with oxycontin, people not warned of the addiction potential, doctors not told the truth about what would happen to their patients. No more blaming addicts for the behaviors that addiction caused; we need to blame the factors that created the addiction to begin with. Poor people are blamed for being poor. Uneducated people are blamed for not being able to find jobs that pay enough to live on, and blamed for not going to college when they never had any hope of going. People with brain-chemistry disorders are blamed for behaviors that they had no control over, especially when there's so little access to medical care for their particular problem, "mental illness." When someone becomes homeless, and it's due to these things that they had no control over, we need to stop blaming them and asking them to fix those problems before they can get a hand up. 91% of people who are homeless are able to have long-term success in a Housing First model. The emotional and brain-chemistry issues most people face when homeless are alleviated by finally having a stable, safe place to live, which helps everyone; and for those with a brain-chemistry disorder that caused them to become homeless to begin with, it makes their brain-chemistry more managable because most Housing First programs come with to resources that help people get medical care so they can manage their brain-chemistry imbalance and emotional trauma. The price of housing is putting more and more people into homelessness, and increasingly, these are people who did not have a brain-chemistry disorder such as schizophrenia to cause it. For anyone who is homeless, the solution isn't to examine their individual reasons for living unhoused--the solution is to give them housing.

[@hundejahre]

My home city. I don’t live there anymore but still love it and love this idea.

[@lephtovermeet]

1 - vacancy tax that increases every year things are unoccupied, including retail and officr and empty lots. eminent domain for unclaimed lots. 2 - Ban corporate and foreign sales. Tax sales of 2nd and 3rd homes a lot. 3 - Unscrew all the suffocating zoning and redtape issues. 4 - Repeal the Fairchild act and build affordable housing.

[@foxylovelace2679]

When corporations are unhappy you can be assured its the right choice

[@gabrielladias420]

You need to change the title of this video to "Chicago's half-assed non-solution to 'end' homelessness". Do better. Don't settle for mediocre legislation, that's how neoliberalism thrives.

[@RoseKindred]

There was a large grocery store in my town, it sat empty for almost 15 years. The owners were in no rush to find someone else to open in there because the negative helped their other lots. The same can be seen elsewhere in the county (not the wealthiest but a "decent" county), with businesses closed down for years and blocks of empty buildings. I understand things take time, but when you see business after business empty for almost a decade, they could be put to better use.

[@Bennick323]

7:19 I like this lady who's like "I like the idea that we will pay less taxes; who could be against this? Plus we'll help fix this social issue." Pretty heavily implies she would not be in favor of fixing this issue if it cost her more in taxes.

[@jelkbaker9780]

As an Australian, housing being an investment commodity is the exact problem we're experiencing. In my city the median house price is over $1.5 million, and it doesn't look like it's going down. This is an issue that exists worldwide, and I'm glad to see people coming up with solutions.

[@iamsam4260]

Capitalism is a sickness everywhere. They exploit and extort the working class in the name of good business.

[@raybod1775]

It’s not a solution. Adults need to work and stop partying all night. There a toxic ghetto culture in certain neighborhoods in Chicago that thinks they’re owed a living. Poor neighborhoods are heavily subsidized in the wrong ways.

[@SHADOWGAMING-jb2ti]

BIG COMPANIES OUR BUYING OUR HOMES MAKING THEM MORE EXPENSIVE🗣️🗣️🗣️🗣️

[@CONSCIOUSCOMA]

as far as I know lobbyists were never part of the constitution

[@Bettinbig7024]

Thanks for posting.

[@philalethistry7937]

I was born in Chicago and am very proud! Unfortunately I live in Arizona now but I hope the rest of the country will follow Chicago's lead. Corporate and political corruption is the norm across the States and it needs to end right now. If the rich find out they can just kill the poor en masse without consequence... where will we go from there? Lobbying must be made illegal.

[@crimson4066]

Bring Chicago Home is fine and dandy if you're looking to buy a home AND you have an above average income WITH above average savings. It's completely worthless if you're actually in need of a home. This video was clickbait. It will not end homelessness at all. Chicago spends $2,000,000,000 (2 billion USD) on police every year and only 1% of that on helping the homeless. It's also 50% of our education budget. Homelessness is a policy choice, but the one being promoted in this video has nothing to do with it. More Perfect Union has become the Buzzfeed version of progressive news. It's giving brainrot.

[@markbush6918]

Spoken like a lobbyist.

[@raybod1775]

@@crimson4066 Police are necessary as well as good judges, prosecutors and jails.

[@trioptimum9027]

Making it a tax on sales is smart. There are lots of people who bought houses cheap and who are hit hard by the increase in the book value of their homes: they're not investing, they need the house to live in, so "it's worth $1m" doesn't matter nearly as much as "now you gotta pay taxes on $1m" to them. Now, I rent, so my sympathy for people lucky enough to have bought in back when that was something a working person could do isn't enormous... but it's not zero either. Taxing high-ticket sales is a way to claw back something from the people who are using housing as an investment, as a money-making scheme, without hitting people who are living in their houses.

[@crimson4066]

Pure clickbait. There is nothing radical about updating a property tax policy by a few percentiles. It's not groundbreaking. If this were a video game, nobody would care because nothing about it is game-changing. This bill makes no mention of homelessness. And it makes no mention of shelter accessibility. None. Bring Chicago Home is fine and dandy if you're looking to buy a home AND you have an above average income WITH above average savings, but it's completely worthless if you're actually in need of a home. Chicago spends $2,000,000,000 (2 billion USD) on police every year and only 1% of that on helping the homeless. It's also 50% of our education budget. Homelessness is a policy choice, but the the policy being promoted in this video has nothing to do with it.

[@trioptimum9027]

@@crimson4066Why are you replying to me? If you read carefully, you will notice that my comment ALSO makes no mention of homelessness. You're not even strawmanning here, you're imaginarymanning. I'm not from Chicago and I've no familiarity with the city's budget, so I really can't speak to how the money's going to be spent. I am a police abolitionist, so I certainly agree with you there! As to the substance of my comment, I might also point out that doubling the tax rate on sales over 1.5m could well send real estate investors elsewhere, which could help limit the rise in housing prices in Chicago even if the city just takes the money and wastes it on a bigger police black site and shiny new city council letterhead.

[@rwoodward8839]

I want to take everything you own that you are not using and give it to the needy, except the things I want for myself. I decide who is needy BTW.

[@phackqu]

Maybe stop giving away american taxes aka foreign aid so willy-nilly

[@candaceewell9582]

I ask if rent control or subsidized housing is the solution! Rent control to me opens up the door for landlords not doing repairs and maintenance! Subsidized housing, not an actual project style housing but rent choice, only encourages rent increases! I only see corporations FIGHTING TOOTH AND NAIL to stop permanent housing!! Anyone have an opinion on this?

[@johnnynick3621]

Simple.... get government out of the housing regulation business. It costs MORE per square foot to build affordable housing than to build luxury housing. That is entirely the fault of government regulations. Get government out of the way and affordable housing would spring up within a year because builders would be able to afford to build.

[@britttiff4084]

We need to unite and ensure this gets implemented in Chicago and everywhere in America!

[@bulletsandbracelets4140]

so excited to see this happen!!! Chicago is ready for some change, I really think this will go incredibly well if the word is spread and a vote happens

[@shekharmoona544]

Can't they forgo a super yacht for one year maybe hold off on that mega mansion beach house?

[@elizabethficarelli2126]

Right? It is nauseating to see how the wealthy behave and still don’t go without a thing to help so many others who work hard and still get nowhere 😢

[@RichyN25]

Major corporations scooping up homes left and right and then charging insane amounts of rent are a major part of the issue. Housing costs are insane these days, renting or buying, across the entire US.

[@nofurtherwest3474]

Idk I think lot of people just don’t want to get the eduction to make more money. My advice is to get the education to learn a trade or medical job. What’s so hard about that

[@honestfriend767]

Exactly so why isn’t the solution to address that. Why do democrats always want to raise taxes which the cost gets passed on to renters.

[@RichyN25]

@@nofurtherwest3474 problem with that is you can do that, and then those jobs still don't pay shit, $50-$60k today isn't the $50-$60k it used to be in the 2000s where a house was affordable

[@willia_music]

@@nofurtherwest3474 Average cost of a trade school education is $17,600 a year. Let's say it's a 2 year school and they need to take out a loan. Interest on that loan will be high because of their low income so let's put that to 7%. I'm going to guess they will take loan with the lowest monthly payment. Let's say $272/mo for 20 years. That's a total of $65,497 to payback the loan. Now tell me how that will lift them out of poverty when the morning decision is to buy soap to be presentable for that minimum wage job interview or breakfast for them and or family.

[@philipanthonylebanno7089]

​@honestfriend767 because the taxes are only a half measure. If you exclude the top 1% of Americans, the average income drops from 75k a year to 53, exclude the top 20 and it drops down to 35. The reality is that they need to be taxed fairly, bc currently they profit off of price gouging the working class at every turn, and then the heaviest tax burden also falls onto the working class due to how our system operates on income taxes. It's bs, and they know it, both parties know this, the only difference is that one supports the rich, and the other fails to support the workers and poor. It's possible for change, but neither side is either willing to or capable of. It's a betrayal of every working man and woman in the entire country.

[@ErutaniaRose]

Honestly anything that pisses off landlords is a good thing. Housing should be a right, and it’s not at all surprising that giving people a house makes homelessness decrease. This country needs socialism, stop commodifying basic needs!

[@bamkablam]

The big rich derp pocketed RE industry is not in an ‘existential crisis’ - What a gaslighter

[@SchmCycles]

I changed my voter registration to my Chicago address in the spring so I could vote on this issue. Too bad it didn't pass. Why, I think it was because wealthy developers convinced enough voters it was a property tax increase even though it didn't affect property taxes at all. Kind of like how Ken Griffin mis-information campaign, back when Pritzker tried to get a progressive income tax referendum passed, convinced enough voters it was an income tax increase even though the legislature had already passed an income tax plan that would have reduced income taxes for about 90% of the tax payers that would have gone into effect had the referendum passed.

[@JulianaBlewett]

When I drive into Chicago I see a former I think Bank building that has been shuttered for probably 10 years and it would make a perfect property for apartments. Corporations are not people and shouldn't be treated as such. And venture capitalists shouldn't be allowed to come in and swoop up properties in a local housing market.

[@AlexKawa20]

I just went to Chicago, and saw some ads for it. Hope it passes on March 19!

[@praecorloth]

Markets aren't equipped to deal with the problems caused by markets.

[@DistrustHumanz]

All I need is a place to park my van and exist between shifts at my full-time job. Unfortunately, American society does not allow that.

[@JamesZaraza-wv3gt]

The tax is just accomplishing what free will can’t. Those with exorbitant properties containing unused rooms could be reaping a social and spiritual benefit by voluntarily engaging the homelessness issue. Fear is a heck of a drug.

[@peterbathum2775]

Welcome to American oligarchy. Since 2010 scotus decision Citizens United billionaires can buy any vote they want from Congress.

[@Sam_on_YouTube]

I would ALSO have a high tax penalty of housing that is not occupied by a permanent resident. If you have a second home that is taking up housing, pay to house the homeless. If you have a short term rental that takes away housing from permanent residents, pay to house the homeless. If you charge too much for rent on multiple units so that you can profit from those who can pay and get a tax write off for those who can't, then pay a fee high enough to make it unprofitable to keep the rent artificially high.

[@wildfire9280]

I think Detroit might have a theoretically stronger plan in motion than Chicago, targeting underdevelopment, overpricing, absentee ownership, and speculation all in one.

[@markmccormack1796]

Housing costs have always been my biggest expense every month, whether I owned the house or rented. But, now, the rents are insane even here in FLA. At some point someone has to pay to get these people into secure housing. The Gov't can help make up the difference. But, it needs to be done - in the "richest country in the history of the planet".

[@claudiamariebermudez6727]

Housing is a right! It will cost more for tax payers to have people unhoused because these communities use more public service while unhoused. Housing people is the humane thing to do and it will put less stress on public services.

[@adamkral8110]

Got it. Step 1) Tax the Rich more Step 2) Gov’t pays the Rich to build a few more homes Step 3) Homeless still can’t afford rent consistently (for numerous systemic reasons). Step 4) congratulate yourselves for accomplishing nothing

[@DragonKeeper69]

Nationalize the real estate industry and we'll never have another houseless person in this country

[@mmyr123]

Oh yeh, that's a great idea. Why don't you just nationalize everything? What next, give everybody a house? Why don't we give everyone a million dollars? Why? Because the mean people want other people to suffer? What is with everyone feeling they deserve everything from other people. Earn your own stuff. Other people don't owe you %^$#.

[@VigilantnotMilitant]

Labor creates all wealth. All profit is theft from workers. Production is necessarily social. No one is an island. No capitalist can get their workers to work or commodities to market without public roads. We are all interdependent. Capitalism is the dictatorship of the rich. Socialism is a workers' democracy over production. Landlords are parasites. Workers will fight for and win housing for all.

[@DragonKeeper69]

@@mmyr123 it's all about excess. There's more than enough homes to go around. We have more money than most other countries in the world. Our government can sacrifice a few billion from the military budget to put roof over the heads of their citizens. We don't need to struggle like this, we're more evolved than this. We're not animals stop trying to behave that way

[@mmyr123]

@DragonKeeper69 you speak like it's msnbc telling you what to say. The government can pay. Don't you understand that the government does not have any money. The people have to pay. Do you notice the prices going up. That is you paying for it. Turn off the TV and turn on your brain. Think.

[@DragonKeeper69]

@@mmyr123 MSNBC would never say what I said. Don't be naive, they're center right at best. We pay billions in tax money, we have more than enough to pay for housing. You're repeating an unfounded lie and it's harming you and the people around you. You deserve better, what I am talking about is true American values. Not "pulling yourself up by your bootstraps" which is physically impossible by the way. We fight for what's right, working till we die so a few rich people and their kids can live their lives of excess is not right. You deserve more than to struggle all your life. It's not a badge of honor to work until you drop. Love yourself more, please I am begging you

[@the.masked.one.studio4899]

👏👏👏👏 I’d LOVE to see one about the homeless in NYC!!! I’m in a shelter here and I totally agree with everyone, what I’d like to add is how lack of medical accessibility also makes most people homeless. I’ve met so many people in shelters and I’ve stayed in several myself. I have several disabilities and I only found out while staying in my 4th shelter. I’m autistic and I’ve developed a “special interest” in mental health/disability/domestic abuse. Going through my own and my daughter’s diagnosis journeys, I’ve learned a great deal about symptoms and behaviors that show up from untreated medical conditions. I’ve never met someone in a shelter who did not display signs of major disabilities (I’m including those developed from domestic violence). Being unhoused is traumatic and it stays with us. I’m not saying people cannot overcome this, but we cannot deny the real daily challenges that we face. 💖💖💖 Thank you for your humanity and empathy towards us. I hope this catches on!!!!!!!!

[@bobalmond8257]

5:41 waiting for landlords to provide lower rent properties is like waiting for a weasel to return your chicken.

[@lawman3966]

I heard that there'll be $100 million a year to help 70,000 people. That's about $1450 per person. That sounds like about enough for one month's rent. Seems like much more than that will be needed.

[@cultureal9544]

Plenty of empty buildings with no tenants in downtown ... Or hey, ask ALL CHURCHES to take in 10 people per year, you know, the Christian thing to do for those tax breaks.