Yep, the issue is real in California. Also in NYC. Homeless people are a social problem very difficult to address.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Commits $2.5 Billion to Fight California Housing Crisis
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I work in a somewhat affluent suburb of Chicago (ie a house on less than half an acre can fetch a price of almost $1,000,000, just for the land). Not only can I not afford a house here on my salary, the property taxes are already higher than my salary. And of course, the people around here prefer houses than large condo/apartment complexes, plus we're landlocked, so there's no real option to add additional housing.
Consumer spending in America made up 68% of the US economy and 2/3rd of consumer spending is on services such as housing and healthcare. What Apple is basically seeing is that, in order to get Americans to spend more on their products (because this is a good community marketing campaign) is that, to help free up that cash flow that would have had gone into housing and healthcare into the pockets of government and corporations.
The economy is like a revolving door. Corporations create jobs, people with jobs make money and they spend that money on goods and services that create more jobs to produce more of those goods and services. But it is clear that in this globalized economy that Corporations still create jobs, but those jobs are becoming more globalized and more competitive and may not benefit the local economy. What multiple attempts in Quantitative Easing had done did not help the common wage earner. All it did was to enrich the coffers of the rich and raised asset prices, rather than help and innovate the economy and create more jobs. Basically the rich had influenced the government to enriched themselves. Apple sees this as a threat, because Apple obviously need people to run their companies, they need people to be able to work in the jurisdiction they are in. So the move to building social housing is the next solution. Just provide low cost social housing to people and they can afford to live in California and work for those corporations. The fallout from this is that, it lowers the cost of housing and if these people now have extra money left because of this, the idea is that eventually they will use this extra discretionary income to spend on stuff. Apple being in the forefront of this community building will obviously benefit as people will be appreciative of Apple and may go up and buy Apple products. Apple makes profits from these people and then in turn translates some of those profits back to shareholders. So in a way, it is an indirect way for doing QE on consumers. Allowing consumers to free up cash flow that would otherwise be tied up to services.
Global economy is slowing down due to ongoing uncertainty with trade wars, Brexit and now Wexit in Canada. Populism is causing major shifts and chaos and uncertainty and this can cause depressed growth in many corporations moving forward. Helping the local community via QE infusion of indirect cash assistance through social housing and I think eventually some form of assisted social healthcare is the only way to free up some of cashflow the consumers had allocated to. You are not going to get wage growth in double digits unless your work relates to tech or highly skilled in demand or even in high single digit in demand driven industries for years to come I think due to again, precarious contract work and piece meal work and technology which helps tame inflation and depress wage growth for the foreseeable future.
The economy is like a revolving door. Corporations create jobs, people with jobs make money and they spend that money on goods and services that create more jobs to produce more of those goods and services. But it is clear that in this globalized economy that Corporations still create jobs, but those jobs are becoming more globalized and more competitive and may not benefit the local economy. What multiple attempts in Quantitative Easing had done did not help the common wage earner. All it did was to enrich the coffers of the rich and raised asset prices, rather than help and innovate the economy and create more jobs. Basically the rich had influenced the government to enriched themselves. Apple sees this as a threat, because Apple obviously need people to run their companies, they need people to be able to work in the jurisdiction they are in. So the move to building social housing is the next solution. Just provide low cost social housing to people and they can afford to live in California and work for those corporations. The fallout from this is that, it lowers the cost of housing and if these people now have extra money left because of this, the idea is that eventually they will use this extra discretionary income to spend on stuff. Apple being in the forefront of this community building will obviously benefit as people will be appreciative of Apple and may go up and buy Apple products. Apple makes profits from these people and then in turn translates some of those profits back to shareholders. So in a way, it is an indirect way for doing QE on consumers. Allowing consumers to free up cash flow that would otherwise be tied up to services.
Global economy is slowing down due to ongoing uncertainty with trade wars, Brexit and now Wexit in Canada. Populism is causing major shifts and chaos and uncertainty and this can cause depressed growth in many corporations moving forward. Helping the local community via QE infusion of indirect cash assistance through social housing and I think eventually some form of assisted social healthcare is the only way to free up some of cashflow the consumers had allocated to. You are not going to get wage growth in double digits unless your work relates to tech or highly skilled in demand or even in high single digit in demand driven industries for years to come I think due to again, precarious contract work and piece meal work and technology which helps tame inflation and depress wage growth for the foreseeable future.
I'm selfish, so this annoys me that my money is being given away to people who created their own problem. If you can't afford California.... Move. It's simple. I live where taxes are low, my state doesn't rob me to pay for their social services, and life is good. I feel no pity for people who don't actively try to change their outcome instead of pounding the sand demanding they keep their same conditions and everybody else change to support them.
The problem in California is that no development and construction licenses are given which in turns are authorized by the local communities which in turn want to avoid overpopulation in their neighbourhoods.
[automerge]1572881243[/automerge]
I really dont thnink it is a social problem. If there is plently of housing, prices would go down and even for a "homless" person would be feasible to pay a rent and home some roof. A state where earnings less thatn 100k$ means you are poor, does not have a social problem, but an economic one.
So when housing prices rise you think banks should get a piece of the profit beyond the value of the mortgage? The idea that banks bear no risk in lending is very weird. Both sides have some risk.
Everything has risk. Better to educate than come up with wild schemes trying to save everyone from life’s choices.
You mean: here is a great example of capitalism applying a band-aid to a problem capitalism created in the first place.
The scary thing is, when they move, they start trying to vote in the same taxes and policies that caused them to need to move in the first place.
"If you wont share your own home then you cant advocate building more houses for more people"
What sort of boring moon logic is that.
"Oh you wont donate all your spare money to cancer research? Guess you must like kids dying of cancer so."
The idea that anti-Apple boycotts are actually something they're concerned about seems unlikely. Apple continues to have very high brand awareness and positivity; the "SHEEPLE"/"CRAPPLE" crowd, or even the "right to repair" folks, are a tiny minority.
The more obvious reason why they're doing this is the housing crisis has gotten so bad that it's impacting Apple's ability to hire and retain workers, from the people cleaning the spaceship campus to its engineers. Even for someone making six figures, the Bay Area is expensive, and if you want to buy a home it's pretty much impossible unless you're making significantly more or come from wealth.
They went and built their shiny new campus, so they can't decamp somewhere else with a cheaper cost of living.
What's sad is that we're at a point where California's government is so dysfunctional and constrained by NIMBYs refusing to cede an inch to denser housing options that private corporations are stepping in to address the issue.
It doesn't help that California and more liberal states are dealing with the rest of the country's homeless problem, as they will literally ship homeless to them to try and get them out of their own towns. Talk about passing the buck (especially since it'd be a lot easier to home these people in areas with lower costs of living.)
No kidding, look at Denver, SLC, Nashville, Austin. It's like a spreading virus when they leave, I agree.
Last edited:
Gavin Newsom is involved so NO the money wont be spent efficiently. Whatever that guy touches turns to trash.
This is why people in other states despair when they hear a California company is relocating to their state for lower taxes. It brings a bunch of people who believe homeless tents are some sort of magic force of nature that markets should fix and not an obvious and complete failure of political will. Guess what - other states don’t need apps tracking public defication. Amazing.
Please don’t move to Austin. We have enough California refugees as it is.
Homeless people are on drugs. They wouldn't move anywhere else because of their drug dealers, moving somewhere else they would lose that connection. If sane people really couldn't afford to live in California. They would move somewhere else they can afford.
This is more Apple to get tech workers from other countries to come to the US.
This is more Apple to get tech workers from other countries to come to the US.
I left Northern CA in 2005, Sacramento area. I lucked out and sold my then 4 year old home for double what I paid for it, to a San Fran resident fleeing that city because of cost.
I have visited that state many times since to see friends and family. Every time I go back it is worse and worse. We were in LA for spring break this year and I will never go back to that city. The traffic is worse than ever, hard to believe but it is. The beaches (rented a VRBO home on the beach in Playa Del Rey) were dirty. Homeless basically everywhere and I mean everywhere! Motor homes along the beach area roads that are open land for the most part. I thought it was people traveling there to visit. After a few days you realize these are homeless people. They park and never leave and the city/state never does anything. It is better than the full on camps in the same area that are tent/tarp cities.
The state is burning because the environmental protection laws are so tight that no one can cut down the old timber or clear brush. They have created the perfect storm of Tinder Boxes and now they are paying the price.
Rumors are swirling that Prop 13 (look it up) will be overturned to generate much need tax revenue. If that happens you will have long time residents see their property taxes in cities like LA go from 5k to 150k a year if not more. The mass exodus will ensue. No worries rich foreigners will swoop in and buy up those properties.
If Apple was smart they would pull out of CA. The should just burn that 2.5 billion and have a BBQ, it will amount to more in the end.
I have visited that state many times since to see friends and family. Every time I go back it is worse and worse. We were in LA for spring break this year and I will never go back to that city. The traffic is worse than ever, hard to believe but it is. The beaches (rented a VRBO home on the beach in Playa Del Rey) were dirty. Homeless basically everywhere and I mean everywhere! Motor homes along the beach area roads that are open land for the most part. I thought it was people traveling there to visit. After a few days you realize these are homeless people. They park and never leave and the city/state never does anything. It is better than the full on camps in the same area that are tent/tarp cities.
The state is burning because the environmental protection laws are so tight that no one can cut down the old timber or clear brush. They have created the perfect storm of Tinder Boxes and now they are paying the price.
Rumors are swirling that Prop 13 (look it up) will be overturned to generate much need tax revenue. If that happens you will have long time residents see their property taxes in cities like LA go from 5k to 150k a year if not more. The mass exodus will ensue. No worries rich foreigners will swoop in and buy up those properties.
If Apple was smart they would pull out of CA. The should just burn that 2.5 billion and have a BBQ, it will amount to more in the end.
This is terrible and utterly classless. The problem definitely isn’t the billionaire oligarchs in CA, but a powerless class of people with no voice who are easy to scapegoat.
Unfortunately, expecting a white supremacist to engage in good-faith on issues such as immigration and affordable housing for the poor and the homeless is probably a losing proposition.
The data I've seen doesn't back that up.
About the only thing that seems like could help is the $300m in land for affordable housing. If Apple sells / leases it contingent on buildings affordable, dense, housing, then it might have a small impact.
That's...what the organization focuses on? Long-term sustainable housing. I can't see how an extra $50m wouldn't help?
This is absolutely the #1 issue. Zoning regulations which restrict and prevent dense housing in convenient areas. Change the zoning rules and reduce the regulatory burdens and more affordable housing will be built.
[automerge]1572884209[/automerge]
Surely you don't really believe this? I hope this is just trolling? Because if you're not, I just don't know where to start...
Stock price is up ~1 dollar. That's their payback. Spending money ≠ bad, and his only duty to shareholders is to increase shareholder value.
Easy, just ask a realtor. That is after you get into the one percent club. Affordable a relative term. What makes the solution so difficult to find. ?
This is terrible and utterly classless. The problem definitely isn’t the billionaire oligarchs in CA, but a powerless class of people with no voice who are easy to scapegoat.
I guess the truth hurts?
I was born and raised in CA. I went to a state college and I paid resident rates. I now live in another state. If my kids wanted to go to a CA state college they would have to pay out of state tuition fees, which makes sense and is the right thing to do.
If my kids were NOT residents of the US, they could illegally come into this country (in CA) and if they had to pay tuition, it would be as a state resident and most likely get some form of financial aid, provided by......the TAX payers. Up to 27 million in tax payer money will be given to illegals for state college in 2019.
This is not some opinion it is straight up fact. This should NOT happen. Who makes this possible?
Problem is, This isn't enough.
And the social programs have been failing due to poor management, and funding limits put in place by capitalists themselves to reap the benefits.
your looking at the wrong source of the problem. its great when one or two of the capitalists do get philanthropic and help. But that is more the exception than the rule.
otherwise, we wouldn't literally have the "top 1%" owning more wealth in the country than 90% of the people.
This massive gross wealth inequality is direct evidence that a pure freemarket approach puts more people into poverty than helps.
The question everyone needs to ask, without going fullblown socialism (bad), what can we do to encourage, if not force more philanthropic ventures by the rich/wealthy to get more people out of poverty?
Being a native Californian that recently moved to Texas, I'm curious about how much of that is actually true.
The type of people you wouldn't want moving here would never consider anywhere other than California a viable place to live. All my friends thought I was crazy for wanting to move to Texas, and most would rather have 5 roommates in Orange County than live in Texas with their own apartment. This couple at my university that moved to Forth Worth were probably more stereotypical Texan than most native Texans I meet.