basically, the extra tax revenue gets squandered in additional layers of bureaucracy.
1 Like
Thanks for this. I wonder, if hybrid work stays in place (come to work 2-3 days a week), some of those 9 people that missed out will put up with a longer commute so the demand might lessen a little.
After living in Chicago, am shocked to see IL having one of the lowest homeless rates
I’ll argue that 2-3 days / week is not “hybrid”. I’d put that as still in-person. Because you need to be within reasonable commute (60-90 minutes) for those several days / week. Doesn’t really change where you get to reside, just which roads you drive on.
“hybrid” is more like “live in Pierre, North Dakota and work remotely 7 weeks in a row, then come to the Asheville office for a week.” So your permanent residence can be outside of the metropolitan area of the office (but doesn’t have to be!).
1 Like
2 Likes
south is my guess, not north
Who needs two Dakotas anyway
That’s what I was thinking, we can combine the Dakotas and add Puerto Rico to maintain 50 states and save the expense of printing new flags or having people forget the number of states since 51 is harder to remember than 50.
Alternatively we can reunite the Virginias although the language divergence, economic issues, unfinished state of war and nuclear war rhetoric by the north from that fat dictator of theirs may hinder things.
1 Leave Georgia.
2 Go to SF.
3 Sit?
2 Likes
The primary reason we have two Dakotas is that the GOP of that era, aware that the Dakota Territory was inhabited with individuals likely to vote Republican, decided they wanted an extra 3 votes in Congress and the Electoral College.
1 Like
That would mean the country roads wouldn’t take you home anymore.
3 Likes
That’s ok, the song was written about Maryland anyways. They just changed the name of the state to West Virginia to make the rhythm better – the song writers never went to West Virginia.
3 Likes
Not exactly…
1 Like
Dang it… why is this thread mixed in with my “latest”? 
1 Like
I used to love those threads (maybe on AO or some other forum) where someone was fresh out of college and asking for advice and somebody resurrected the thread 12 years later to answer.
4 Likes
This chart gives the numbers by state. I think it would be better to see it by city.
I did some quick searching, but am seeing huge differences in some of the reporting. The Chicago Coalition for the Homeless says that there are 68k people experiencing homelessness in Chicago in 2024. But the PIT count from a survey gave a number of 6,139. I get that one is Point in Time and one is aggregate, I just didn’t expect that large of a swing.
I did find one difference in how they count it - the Coalition includes those who don’t have their own homes but did find someone to stay with (family, friend, etc.) The PIT number (which is the official number from the city) excludes those people.
Seems SF is now taxing empty residential units.
They are doing something similar over here in the UK to try to stop people just sitting on property and not renting it out.
I believe Vancouver, BC has been doing this for several years.
I don’t know about San Francisco specifically, but where I live the problem is corporations buying up many single family homes.
So exempting single family homes would do almost nothing.
Exempting people who own two or fewer housing units would make far more sense than exempting single family homes and duplexes.
Oops, that reply was to Poly’s post. I don’t know why it’s showing Former Actuary or how to fix it.