Thread #1490452
Anonymous
NYC Mayor Mamdani says either wealthy get taxed more or property taxes will go up 02/17/26(Tue)23:08:24 No.1490452
NYC Mayor Mamdani says either wealthy get taxed more or property taxes will go up 02/17/26(Tue)23:08:24 No.1490452
NYC Mayor Mamdani says either wealthy get taxed more or property taxes will go up Anonymous 02/17/26(Tue)23:08:24 No.1490452 [Reply]▶
File: 9743e907505e5758b521ad9d986dc3f0.jpg (96.4 KB)
96.4 KB JPG
https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/zohran-mamdani-nyc-mayor-budget/
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani unveiled his preliminary financial plan Tuesday on the heels of the announcement that the state will give the city $1.5 billion to help fix a massive budget shortfall.
His tax-centric new fiscal plan seeks to close a multibillion budget gap with two choices: sock it to the rich or sock it to property owners.
Mamdani says his new spending plan is the truth, gimmick-free. To some, however, the threat of raising property taxes if he doesn't get a wealth tax from Albany is the biggest gimmick of all.
"As the mayor of New York City, I have a legal obligation to balance the budget. I will meet that obligation," Mamdani said. "When we took office, we inherited a historic budget gap."
Mamdani said that what had initially been a $12 billion gap was lowered to $7 billion due to steps his administration has taken, as well as incorporating income from Wall Street bonuses. That gap has since been lowered even further to $5.4 billion due to an infusion to New York City of $1.5 billion from the state, thanks to Gov. Kathy Hochul.
"While considerably less, it is still a significant chasm," Mamdani said. "There are two paths to bridge this gap. The first is the most sustainable and the fairest path. This is the path of ending the drain on our city and raising taxes on the richest New Yorkers and the most profitable corporations. The onus for resolving this crisis should not be placed on the backs of working and middle class New Yorkers. If we do not fix this structural imbalance, and do not heed the calls of New Yorkers to raise taxes on the wealthy, this crisis will not disappear. It will simply return, year after year forcing harder choices each time."
Mamdani said the only other option - a so-called "second path" - is the city would have to raise property taxes and raid its reserves.
117 RepliesView Thread
Showing all 117 replies.>>
"The options of the second path are the options of last resort," Mamdani said. "Options that we will only employ if there is no other means of arriving at a balanced budget."
Mamdani said he will do everything in his power in the coming months to work on a solution with lawmakers in Albany to avoid raising property taxes locally.
Mamdani might have some trouble getting taxes on the wealthy approved since Hochul has repeatedly said no to the idea.
"Part of our ability to shrink the gap has come from incorporating higher-than-expected revenues from Wall Street. Wall Street profits are at a record high, surpassing any projections and allowing us to incorporate more revenue than anyone anticipated. Those record profits translate into increased tax revenue," Mamdani said.
He said Wall Street's hot streak means $2.4 billion in more revenue in FY2026 and $4.9 billion in FY2027.
"But responsible governance is not only about revenue. It is also about discipline. That means finding savings across city government, reducing bureaucratic waste, and rendering agencies more efficient and cost effective," Mamdani said.
Mamdani said he's created chief savings officers in every city agency for the purpose of identifying ways to streamline their organizations.
Mamdani called for a 2% raise on the personal income tax of the 33,000 New Yorkers who make more than $1 million a year, along with raising corporate taxes, to help close the ongoing budget gap.
"As we know, New Yorkers contribute 54.5% of state revenue, but receive only 40.5% back," Mamdani said. "Once again, I am calling on Albany to end the drain."
>>
Mamdani said if Albany doesn't raise taxes on the wealthy or corporations, that leaves the city with only one option - raising property taxes.
"At the heart of this path is a property tax increase. This would effectively be a tax on working and middle class New Yorkers who have a median income of $122,000," Mamdani said. "The second path also requires us to raid our reserves."
"The property tax increase, if the city was forced to do so, would be at a 9.5% increase. That is something that we do not want to do, and this is something that we are going to utilize every single option to ensure does not come to pass," the mayor added.
To some, however, it was a cynical attempt to wring more money out of Albany. Hochul, who is facing re-election, has already ruled out taxing the rich, even though by Mamdani's calculations it is only 33,000 New York City residents.
Tuesday, she said she was against a property tax hike.
"I'm not supportive of property tax increases. I don't think that's necessary. But let's fund out what's really necessary for him to close the gap," Hochul said.
Mamdani said this is not an issue of ideology versus reality.
"This is not a conversation on the basis of ideology. This is a conversation about a fiscal crisis," Mamdani said. "And when faced with this crisis, the question is who should pay these taxes? I believe that it should be the wealthiest New Yorkers, the most profitable corporations."
City Council Speaker Julie Menin immediately called a property tax hike a non-starter.
"At a time when New Yorkers are already grappling with an affordability crisis, proposing significant property tax increases should not be on the table whatsoever," Menin said.
>>
Mamdani said the budget crisis he's addressing today "did not materialize overnight. It originated with Mayor Adams' 2025 November plan."
Mamdani said that the Adams administration "significantly understated" the deficits of its budgets, totaling a $12 billion budget gap.
Mark Levine, the city's comptroller, said in January that the city is facing its largest gap since the Great Recession.
Both Levine and Mamdani partly blame former Mayor Eric Adams, saying the crisis stemmed from a pattern of underbudgeting essential services.
"This crisis has a name and a chief architect. In the words of the Jackson 5, it's as easy as ABC. This is the Adams budget crisis," Mamdani said in January. "He systematically under-budgeted services that New Yorkers rely on every single day."
A spokesperson for Adams said the former mayor inherited a $10 billion debt that was compounded by the COVID-19 pandemic.
Mamdani also blamed former Gov. Andrew Cuomo. A spokesperson for Cuomo said Mamdani could've fixed any inequities during his time in the state legislature.
>>
NO ONE CARES ABOUT THE RICH FUCK 'EM
YOURE CLOSER TO BEING HOMELESS THAN YOU ARE TO BEING A BILLIONAIRE
AFTER YOUR 999,999,999TH DOLLAR, EVERY SINGLE PENNY YOU MAKE SHOULD GO TO SOCIAL PROGRAMS AND WE NAME A DOG PARK AFTER YOU THAT SAYS "I WON CAPITALISM"
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1490501
>Fell for it again
No, I know exactly what I'm doing.
Pain and suffering for the common folk.
Tricking them into voting against their interests.
Acting like I have some moral superiority.
I am the evil empire. I am Prince John in Robin Hood's clothing.
>>
>>
>>
>>1490506
I STAND BY WHAT I SAID IN MY FIRST POST FUCK THE RICH
BUT YES HES SMART
IN REALITY THERE ARENT ONLY TWO SOLUTIONS BUT BY FRAMING THE ISSUE AS "TAX THE ULTRA WEALTHY" VS "TAX EVERYONE WHO OWNS PROPERTY" HE IS ATTEMPTING TO GET THE MIDDLE AND UPPER MIDDLE CLASSES ON HIS SIDE
>>
>>
>>1490509
...what about the people who rent the property that they're raising taxes on?
Lowering taxes and deregulating to allow small business to thrive is the only solution. But that goes completely against the Democratic platform which is pretty much, "Raise taxes to extortion levels and laundering it like mafioso so I can get a new car or if I'm not corrupt give it to billionaires for services".
Dems are fucking retarded fucking fuckers and they're starting to make me physically ill.
>>
>>1490516
PROPERTY OWNERS ISNT JUST LANDLORDS, ITS ALSO THOSE WHO OWN THEIR OWN HOUSE/PROPERTY. THAT IS THE GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO MAMDANI IS PRESENTING WITH THE FALSE DICHOTOMY OF "IM GNA TAX YOU, OR THE BILLIONAIRES, WHICH DO YOU PREFER".
OF COURSE NO MATTER WHAT THE GOVERNMENT CHOOSES, THE POOR AND RENTERS WILL BE FORCED TO SHOULDER AS MUCH OF THE BURDEN AS THEY CAN BEAR, AND THEN SOME.
THATS CAPITALISM, BABY!!!
>>
>>1490518
That's not capitalism. That's Democratic politics.
Calling excessive taxes to pay for retirement funds capitalism is ridiculous.
And it's not either or, it's both will happen because Democrats think everything can be solved by raising taxes.
I think you need to do some fucking reading.
>>
>>
>>1490520
"THAT'S CAPITALISM BABY" DOESNT REFER TO THE POLICIES PROPOSED IT REFERS TO THE FACT THAT THE POOR AND RENTERS WILL PAY MORE THAN THEIR FAIR SHARE NO MATTER WHAT. WHICH THEY WILL. INCLUDING THE SMALL BUSINESSES WE LOVE, THEY ARE RENTERS TOO.
ALL AMERICAN POLITICIANS REGARDLESS OF PARTY ULTIMATELY SUPPORT FUCKING OVER THE POOR. THEY ARE HEAVILY INCENTIVIZED TO.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1490537
>P-paper say, p-paper say
Dem paper be showin' dem losin' the middle claws dough.
Also MA sucks shit. What are Dems doing with this excess wealth?
>Laundering it through daycares!
Probably. Progressive thieves are always so proud of their stacks of extorted cash.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1490562
>Not 3rd world but there are numerous examples of billionaires moving to places with lower taxes.
Exceptions, not the rule. Usually they just shrug because the one thing they hate more than having to pay taxes is the inconvenience of not living where they want. The big flight of the rich after Mamdani got elected never actually happened.
>>
>>
>>
>>1490575
Wasn't the Luxury tax a failure?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxury_tax#United_States
>In November 1991, The United States Congress enacted a luxury tax and was signed by President George H. W. Bush. The goal of the tax was to generate additional revenues to reduce the federal budget deficit. This tax was levied on material goods such as watches, expensive furs, boats, yachts, private jet planes, jewelry and expensive cars. Congress enacted a 10 percent luxury surcharge tax on boats over $100,000, cars over $30,000, aircraft over $250,000, and furs and jewelry over $10,000. The federal government estimated that it would raise $9 billion in excess revenues over the following five-year period. However, only two years after its imposition, in August 1993, at the behest of the luxury yacht industry, President Bill Clinton and Congress eliminated the "luxury tax" citing a loss in jobs
>Total Revenue vs. Projections: The tax, which applied to cars, boats, aircraft, jewelry, and furs, was projected to raise $9 billion over five years, or roughly $1.5 billion to $1.8 billion annually.
>Actual 1991 Collections: In its first year, the tax only collected about $16.6 million, with some estimates placing the total revenue from the boat tax component at only $3 million to $7.3 million for that period.
>Net Loss: Due to the devastation of the luxury boat industry (with sales dropping by roughly 70%), the government lost more in income and payroll taxes from unemployed workers and paid out more in unemployment benefits than it collected in taxes. The tax was considered a net loss of over $11 million in 1991.
>>
>>
>>
>>1490603
Wouldn't that discourage people from starting new companies?
The Dutch are coming up with a wealth tax of 36%. I can't imagine a startup like Microsoft or Amazon starting up there when they have to pay 36% every year, diluting their company and their capital.
Doesn't Europe have a fraction of the Unicorns compared to America or China? Doesn't Europe make more money imposing fines on American tech companies then all the taxes levied on European tech companies?
>>
>>
>>1490607
Cuba had a lot of revenue opportunities until they ate the rich and seized all their assets
For some reason not many people invested in Cuba after Castro took power. They didn't take advantage of all those revenue opportunities "for some reason"
>>
>>
>>1490611
The options are being Europe, or being America
https://www.reddit.com/r/economy/comments/1prigoq/unicorns_in_the_us_c hina_and_eu_number_and_total/
The US now has over 6 TIMES more startups than the EU with a combined value that is $2.2 trillion higher
I don't think there are 6 times as many revenue opportunities that exist within the United States compared to Europe, so why are there 6 times as many Unicorn Startups in America?
Is it perhaps the high taxes of Europe are discouraging founders from starting their companies there?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1490606
The secret is to make actual growth a mitigating factor. The taxes on hoards should always be much higher than the taxes on productive money that flows through other entities in the same country. Also stock buybacks should never have been legalized.
>>
>>
>>1490614
The EU makes more money fining US companies than they make from the tax revenue of all every EU business. The EU would actually collapse if every US business pulled out. The inverse isn't even close to being true though
>>
>>1490647
These are economic terms.
From an economic perspective the difference is as follows:
Saving can be defined as "the amount of an individual's production which is not consumed but rather invested".
Think secure investment funds, CDs, bonds, things of that nature.
Hoarding can be defined as "money which is retained purely as a store of value."
Think gold and other precious metals, real estate portfolios beyond your own needs, or actual money retained due to fear of Deflation.
Hoarding is rare in modern economics. You almost always want your money to be actively accumulating capital or being "put to work". When a society hoards too much, it's a big red flag.
When an economy "hoards" too much, it has a hugely negative impact on the system. When a person saves too little, it can have hugely negative impacts on them when unexpected expenses occur.
Here's a short article:
https://iconeconomics.com/the-difference-between-saving-and-hoarding/
Hope that helps!
>>
>>
>>1490571
>>1490562
>>1490558
Norway lost money by raising taxes:
https://citizenx.com/insights/norway-wealth-exodus/
>Norway's wealth tax increase, expected to raise $146M, led to a $448M net loss as $54B in wealth left the country, reducing tax revenue by $594M.
>>
>>1490650
>From an economic perspective
Neoclassical and/or neoliberal economics exists to tell entitled plutocrats what they want to hear. It is the justification provided for why it's a-okay that the vast majority of Americans have seen flat real incomes since the seventies whilst the already privileged take all of the profit. From *your* economic perspective, you should ask:
>Are things getting better for me each year in this country?
>Are they better for me now than they were for my parents at my age?
>Why are the most coveted consumer products I can afford actually third-party tools for my surveillance, which I am voluntarily acquiescing in?
Hope that helps!
>>
>>
>>
>>1490659
>specific tariffs
well they're not very fucking specific for one. There's a difference between "This millionaire has to pay X more taxes than this mom and pop shop" and "This millionaire and this mom and pop shop have to pay the same price for this tariffed good".
>>
>>1490572
Hmm, I thought the tariffs moved Dems past one dimensional thinking into a place where they could understand taxes a littler better. Maybe the liggeral moniker fits you perfectly.
There's no hoarded wealth. There' no stacks of cash to steal from wealthy people, or very limited.
The wealth comes from businesses and investments. For instance Elon Musk probably has very little liquid cash to spend compared to his net worth.
If you tax his stock holdings you're taxing his business and increasing the price of all of his products. Who pays for his products? The wealthy? No doubt you live in a tent behind the dumpster Starbucks so any guy with a $10 latte has more net worth than you so it may seem like a lot of money, but it's not.
Then what do you think the taxes will be used for? To help the poor? LOL, lel, even.
The taxes are used to pay pensions that blue states are literally drowning in. These pension go to the real leeches: the government workers who can literally vote themselves more money.
Your thought processes are fucked up, and you're retarded. Yet you want to hold power?
Why? You're a fuck up just like most liggeral scum. Fully wagged and ready to do the bidding of whoever buys you ass with a feel-good story.
What fucking scum.
>>
>>1490660
Cool story, now implement it, dipshit scumbag whore.
Mom and pop pay more taxes price of mom and pop's shit shop go up.
Why this not apply to rich guy?
You're a fucking retard. Total fucking retard in a a pool of retarded fucking retards.
Dems need their retirement pensions! Get that money, faggot.
>>
>>
>>1490654
>>1490656
America had a tax on rich people for a while in the '90s, specifically we had additional taxes on luxury goods... But as with every measure that harms rich people, Democrats came up with an excuse to end it
>In November 1991, The United States Congress enacted a luxury tax and was signed by President George H. W. Bush. The goal of the tax was to generate additional revenues to reduce the federal budget deficit. This tax was levied on material goods such as watches, expensive furs, boats, yachts, private jet planes, jewelry and expensive cars. Congress enacted a 10 percent luxury surcharge tax on boats over $100,000, cars over $30,000, aircraft over $250,000, and furs and jewelry over $10,000. The federal government estimated that it would raise $9 billion in excess revenues over the following five-year period. However, only two years after its imposition, in August 1993, at the behest of the luxury yacht industry, President Bill Clinton and Congress eliminated the "luxury tax" citing a loss in jobs.[6] The luxury automobile tax remained in effect until 2002.[7]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1490661
This. We need to shut down or privatize all public goods. Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security in particular are huge drains. Trump has made movement on getting rid of the VA, a major font of waste, which will catch him some flack but will be good for the overall health of this country. The VA has a shit ton of useless employees just collecting paycheck for a service that should never have been socialized, but nobody but Trump was willing to take it on since we all brainwashed by leftists to think veterans are a sacred cow or something.
>>
>>1490688
Well, I'm not a libertarian so I marginally disagree.
I'd be willing to try privatizing most schools.
My major problem with Medicare and Medicaid isn't their existence, it's the fact that they inflate pricing since they don't have to compete to make money. It would be tough to end them however since they're so ingrained in healthcare.
Social security would require an extremely long phase out period or an immediate alternative option of some kind.
Perhaps these programs could be saved, but lobbyists pay hundreds of thousands every year to ensure their bloated and hyper profitable.
Considering the US spends half it's yearly budget propping up healthcare something's got to give though.
>>
>>
Libertarians have no morals other than liberty.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3424229/
Ayn Rand, Paul Ryan, and Rand Paul all walk into a bar.
They order tainted booze and die.
As they lie on the floor breathing their last breath, Ayn Rand turns to the other two and says, "Well, I'm not going to come here again!"
That's libertarianism.
>>
>>
>>1490661
>>1490688
>>1490690
>Eliminate the social safety nets
Good job, you now just made sure America has their own french revolution given trickle down economics and deregulation has made sure the top 1% have hoarded all the wealth and you condemned the poor and working class to, be slaves in squalor, or just starve.
The problem is both parties are corporate right wing, which is why taxing the rich is always met with such resistance. It's already proven that as long as your state and city are functional, the rich will not level even if you jack up their taxes. But they managed to create this hostage mindset where you have to give them everything they want or else they're go Objectivist on you.
Call that bluff, they'll break.
>>
>>1490690
Privatizing schools is a fucking terrible idea. There is no evidence kids from private schools perform better, because private schools are allowed to kick out or not accept dumb kids, inflating their numbers. Private schools are often religious, meaning forcing all kids to go to private schools thru vouchers is a violation of religious freedom, and it sometimes results in a less than stellar science education.
Taxing the wealthy, not giving them new tax breaks, and not bailing them out after the AI bubble bursts is the solution here. It isn't destroying public school and making our 10% illiterate country dumber. It isn't cutting essential life-saving services. It's telling the stupid greedy fucks with dragon-like piles of generational wealth that they don't get to have super yachts and pedo islands.
>>
>>1490709
Can confirm. Went to private school while my sister went to public school. I hold deep bitter resentment in my heart and my sister is socially-adjusted the one who went to grad school while I fuck around all day on construction sites.
Every time I try to tell my parents how much of a costly mistake it was to do that, they just throw out a barrage of excuses that feel insulting to my intelligence
>>
>>1490692
Tell me you have no idea what life-saving procedures cost, what money is worth, and have the empathy of a psychopathic spider, without tell- you know what, don't tell me anything, just shut the fuck up.
The cost of medical care is not really the issue, the issue is the cost of insurance which denies claims to hoard money to enrich insurance execs.
The idea that only a 'failure' wouldn't be able to afford life-saving medical care is objectively not true, in addition to being insanely callous.
You are a horrible person with no understanding of the world. I hope in the revolution they stick your head on a pike and parade it around as a warning to other people who think like this, maybe they'll pay their fucking taxes then.
>>
>>
>>1490452
'Mamdani is a very rational man'
-Donald J. Trump
So either (check one):
[ ] Trump is correct about NYC's mayor and you only have the right to agree with him
[ ] If Mamdani is wrong, therefore Trump isn't rational and must be given the 25A treatment
Choose wisely, miggers.
>>
>>1490709
Why do so many Teachers Union members send their kids to private school instead of public schools?
The teachers in the teachers unions know the good schools and the bad schools more than anyone else. So why do they for the most part refuse to send their kids to the public schools that they so regularly champion?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1490754
Stupid fucking take bro. There are literally current socialist countries that can be looked at. But this stupid mother fucker says “the rich hated Nazi Germany because of the taxes.” Even thinking that Nazis were socialist because they put that word in their party name shows how fucking stupid you are.
>>
>>
>>1490753
Why not Cuba?
Cuba ate the rich after Castro took power
https://tucson.com/news/nation-world/article_2952a36f-386b-543a-b1e6-f 891d4cc31a0.html
They seized all the mansions of the rich, redistributed them into multi-family households called Solares The government seized all the factories.
This created a very interesting natural experiment, where you had Cuban exiles who left Cuba with the clothes on their back, and the Cubans who stayed behind, who had all the assets of the rich.
It didn't take long for that natural experiment to play out, and for the Cuban Exiles to become far richer than Cuba
>>
>>1490755
> Even thinking that Nazis were socialist
You mean the guys that seized factories, businesses and physical wealth from jews by force? Because they accused the jews of monopolizing wealth and exploiting working class germans?
>>
>>
>>
>>1490755
The purpose of a system is what it does. And socialists always try to steal wealth from the middle and upper classes. Every. Single. Time.
Whether that be through taxes or physical violence doesn't matter. They're low-IQ robber barons larping as the underclass so they can steal your shit.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1490650
So if Elon Musks net worth is tied up in Tesla and SpaceX stock, and Bill Gates vast wealth is in Microsoft stock, is maintaining their stock holding saving or hoarding? Is he holding onto the stock as an investment in the future or as a store of value?
>>
>>1490709
Charter schools out perform public schools
https://youtu.be/yFN0nf6Hqk0?
You should watch this documentary, waiting for Superman. It's about all the hoops parents jump through to get their kids enrolled at private schools
>>
>>1490773
You're talking to a retarded shill. Somehow, buying products from these billionaires is them stealing from you. He won't dare oppose the billions of dollars of foreign aid and welfare and excessive taxation that is actually stealing wealth
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1490777
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/taxes/2023/02/21/how-do-rich-peop le-avoid-taxes/11308215002/
160 billion dollars a year stolen from you.
https://www.fedortax.com/blog/texas-billionaire-faces-2b-tax-fraud-cha rge-largest-ever#:~:text=In%20keepi ng%20with%20its%20promise%20to%20pu rsue,company%20that%20provides%20se rvices%20to%20car%20dealerships.
2 billion in tax dollars stolen from you.
Notable Cases of Alleged or Proven Tax Fraud
Robert Brockman: In what has been called the largest tax fraud case in U.S. history, Robert Brockman was charged with an alleged scheme to hide $2 billion in income through offshore accounts. He reportedly used code names and aliases in encrypted communications to conceal his activities, which included purchasing a luxury yacht and high-end homes.
Robert F. Smith: The private equity executive admitted to criminally evading taxes on $200 million in offshore accounts over a 15-year period. In exchange for his cooperation in the case against Brockman, he entered into a non-prosecution agreement and agreed to pay $139 million in penalties and back taxes.
Leona Helmsley: The real estate mogul was famously convicted in 1989 of evading $1.2 million in federal income taxes by illegally claiming personal luxury expenses (such as home renovations) as business costs.
Walter Anderson: An entrepreneur convicted of a large tax evasion case, he owed the U.S. government nearly a quarter of a billion dollars in back taxes at the time of his conviction.
Trump Family: A New York Times investigation uncovered what it described as "dubious tax schemes" and "outright fraud" involving the use of a sham corporation and the undervaluing of properties to reduce tax bills by hundreds of millions of dollars. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/02/us/politics/donald-trum p-tax-schemes-fred-trump.html
Literally so many examples in 5 minutes of research. Lick boots you billionaire shill.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1490452
I support this dude
He's restarting programs to clean out the bums and the hobos from the street and wants to tax wealthy property owners to fix the deficit.
Seems like a win win to me, what's the downside?
Hopefully he'll go after druggies too
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1490813
Actually giving homes to the homeless has a pretty good rate of making them actually become productive members of society. Unsurprisingly a lot of them don't enjoy their current lot in life but don't exactly have a way out in current conditions.
>>
>>
>>1490815
>https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8427990/
>https://homelesshub.ca/blog/2025/preventing-homelessness-in-the-unite d-states-evidence-scaling-and-what- works/
>https://direct.mit.edu/rest/article-abstract/107/5/1187/116185/Do-Hom elessness-Prevention-Programs-Preve nt?redirectedFrom=fulltext
>>
>>1490817
Yeah, but those are just studies from nerds at MIT. I'm sure the random stupid asshole you're responding to totally knows what he's talking about, and isn't a psychopathic piece of human garbage for pushing such horrible misinformation in the face of hard data.
>>
>>
>>
>>