I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang
My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang
But there's more to freedom than that. In urban areas there's far more opportunities for work and education, and significantly better health care. I mean, life out in the boonies is nice, it's fine...but most parents also want their kids to have better opportunities, and for them to live in safer places.
And this is why, if you'll look up the stats, rural states generally have lower educational attainment rates, lower percentages of health insurance coverage, higher poverty rates, higher divorce rates, higher teenage pregnancy rates, higher homicide rates.
Rural states are generally conservative red states...but these statistics are NOT because of conservative governance - it's just the other way around. Rural (red) states have conservative governance because they are rural states...and people who grow up in rural areas are generally more conservative (I was once strongly conservative) - and that's true not just in America, but all over the world.
“To do evil, a human being must first of all believe that what he’s doing is good" - Solzhenitsyn
"...with the terrorists, you have to take out their families." - Donald Trump
I believe merely being more Faithful to an existing federal doctrine and State laws regarding employment at will could solve this simple social dilemma.
One issue in San Francisco is that the regional boundaries used to officially determine median income includes a very prosperous adjacent county, which makes the median income for the area much higher than the actual median income for the city.
If you see a social problem in San Francisco why do you feel justified in devaluing my property to solve that COMMUNITY problem? The landlord can no longer earn the return he counted on, the value of his investment diminishes because value is linked to returns.
Why don't we just seize your car and sell it, then take the money and put it into a rental subsidy pool and give that money to low income renters? What's that, why should your car be seized to pay for that rental pool? I don't know, probably for the same reason that a landlord has to have his asset devalued.
Again this shifts the burden of fixing a social problem onto only a few individuals and those who buy their product. Why should the new buyer pay for the problems of the whole community?The best solution for owned property that I know about is requiring that larger new developments are required to offer a portion of the units at affordable prices.