Back in 2000 , Diallo Shabazz was surprised to see himself on the cover of the University of Wisconsin admissions booklet . But there he was , cheering in the stands at a football game he never attended , just behind a group of white students .\nSome employees in the marketing department had decided to photoshop his face into the image ; this , they thought , was a great way to project a diverse image to prospective students .\nThe decision might seem innocuous to many — a clumsy but well-intentioned attempt by a university to promote diversity . But according to Nancy Leong , a law professor at the University of Denver who focuses on civil rights and discrimination , it happens all the time . And it breeds even more racial resentment in society .\nIn 2013 , Leong wrote a lengthy article in the Harvard Law Review in which she labeled this practice “ racial capitalism ” : the use of nonwhite people by corporations and institutions to make money or boost their brand .\nThink of the controversial 2018 Super Bowl commercial in which Dodge used a Martin Luther King Jr. speech to peddle Ram trucks ; it was one of those uniquely late-capitalist moments where an act of protest or a racially progressive speech was reduced to a bland commercial prop .\nI reached out to Leong to talk about how racial capitalism exploits nonwhite people and why she believes the practice is bad for both individuals and society as a whole . A lightly edited transcript of our conversation follows .\nRacial capitalism is the process of getting some sort of social or economic benefit from someone else ’ s racial identity . In the United States , this usually , though not always , involves white people benefiting from nonwhite racial identity . This is because white people in the US are more likely to have the power and resources to use another person ’ s identity to benefit themselves .\nCan you give me some specific examples of racial capitalism in practice , things that would be familiar to most readers ?\nA common example of racial capitalism is a school or a company intentionally putting photos of people of color on its website to inflate its appearance of diversity . This happens all the time . Sometimes schools have even been known to photoshop people of color into their brochures .\nRacial capitalism could also be something as simple as claiming that you can ’ t be racist because you have a black friend , or including a token minority character in a movie . Or it could be something like quoting Martin Luther King Jr. on Twitter when you ’ ve recently been accused of white supremacist views , like Rep. Steve King ( R-IA ) just did this past MLK Day .\nRacial capitalism is very common , and it ’ s often done by well-intentioned people who are completely unaware they ’ re doing it .\nWhy is racial capitalism problematic from your point of view ?\nToo frequently , racial capitalism is all show and no substance . We have a big problem with race relations in America . Racial capitalism doesn ’ t help , and it sometimes makes things worse .\nRacial capitalism breeds racial resentment . People of color know when they ’ re being showcased to benefit someone else — for example , a student of color whose photo is plastered all over their school ’ s website often resents the school for using them .\nThis is especially true if the student perceives that the school isn ’ t actually doing anything substantive to improve race relations , like providing funding to bring speakers to campus or taking the initiative to recruit racially diverse faculty members .\nI ’ m trying to imagine all the possible motivations for racial capitalism . Is it greed and cynicism ? Is it about signaling , however disingenuously , a commitment to diversity ?\nI think there are a lot of overlapping motivations . One is virtue signaling : “ Look at how inclusive and diverse this company is. ” Another is as a defense against racism : “ I can ’ t be racist because my best friend is black. ” Another is purely economic : “ Our movie will bring in a bigger audience if we cast this popular actor of color , even in a small role . ”\nWhen did this become a thing ? When did nonwhiteness acquire market value and become a commercial prop ?\nI trace it to a 1978 Supreme Court decision called University of California v. Bakke . That decision upheld race-based affirmative action programs but also said the only constitutional justification for affirmative action is promoting racial diversity . So ever since then , “ diversity ” has become a prominent part of our national conversation about race .\nAnd if diversity is a good thing , that gives people a reason to engage in racial capitalism . Of course , this is not to say that diversity is a bad thing , but the fact that the Supreme Court focused on it drew attention away from other important issues .\nFor example , if the Supreme Court had instead held that past discrimination could justify affirmative action — what lawyers call the “ remedial rationale ” — then we as a country would be more likely to have a necessary and painful conversation about race that would include everything from slavery to Jim Crow to redlining to the discriminatory administration of the GI Bill after World War II .\nThis is basically capitalist enterprises reducing race to a brand , in the same way they peddle lifestyles to targeted demographics .\nYes , absolutely . I think you could go even go further and say it is reducing diversity to a brand . This is one of the reasons that racial capitalism is problematic : It treats racial identity and diversity like commodities , which gives the impression that they are just like anything else you could buy or sell .\nIn what sense does whiteness carry inherent economic value in our culture ?\nIt ’ s the default setting . Law professor Cheryl Harris has written a wonderful article about this called “ Whiteness as Property. ” Whiteness has value in almost every setting due to conscious and unconscious bias .\nResearch shows that you are more likely to get a job interview if you have a white-sounding name . White people get better deals when they buy used cars and make more money when they sell things on eBay . Research even shows that professors are more likely to respond to an identical email when they think it was sent by a white student . Law firm partners rate an identical memo higher when they think it ’ s written by a white associate .\nI could go on and on , but you get the point .\nDoes the phenomenon you ’ re describing ever work in the reverse direction ? That is , do nonwhite people and institutions ever use whiteness to acquire social and economic value ?\nOccasionally , it could happen in the other direction . You might see a group that is predominantly people of color including some white people to try to help give legitimacy to the group . White people are sometimes seen as more authoritative even when they aren ’ t , and that can be valuable to nonwhite people .\nIt ’ s because of the way power is distributed in America . The most powerful people in politics , business , education , entertainment , and so on tend to be white — although this is slowly changing — and that means those people are in a position to make decisions that result in commodifying people of color . People of color are less likely to have that position of power .\nAll of this might seem counterintuitive to people , since whiteness has always been such a reliable source of value and power in this country .\nI agree , and it mostly still is . My point is that because of the increased focus on diversity , nonwhiteness also has a certain type of value now too . White people are also increasingly concerned about being labeled racist , and forming relationships — even superficial ones — with nonwhite people might seem like a defense against that .\nThere ’ s something very insidious about the inversion you describe here . For most of our history , nonwhite human beings were assigned value and sold as commodities . Today , a well-intentioned diversity rationale is being used to re-commodify and re-exploit racial differences .\nThis is one of my greatest concerns with racial capitalism . Racial capitalism feeds racial resentment — it ’ s not like nonwhite people don ’ t know what ’ s going on here — and this is like throwing gasoline on the fire of racial tensions .\nAnd , of course , the irony is that the value of nonwhiteness is still largely measured by its worth to white people and predominantly white institutions .\nOne of the big problems with racial capitalism is the way it constrains nonwhite people . If you know your company hired you partly because you are Asian , you might feel pressure to allow your photo to be used all over the website or to attend every diversity event even when you ’ re swamped just doing the work for your actual job .\nWhite people , who aren ’ t usually pressured to do this kind of racial work , can just concentrate on their jobs . This has happened to me , when I am expected to mentor students of color , serve as the faculty adviser for racial affinity groups , or attend diversity events .\nI love doing those things , but it ’ s real work that is not always acknowledged by the institutions to which I ’ ve belonged . Racial capitalism leads to a lot of extra racial work for people of color .\nThere ’ s an example in your article of a largely white college that photoshopped an image of a black student onto a brochure in an attempt to offer the illusion of diversity on campus . I ’ m trying to be as generous as possible here , so I ’ ll just ask : Is this necessarily a bad thing ? Is it possible that they ’ re genuinely seeking to become more diverse and perhaps they just chose a clumsy way of doing it ?\nI do have some sympathy for colleges that do this . I think the generous construction is sometimes true : Colleges want to signal that this is a good place for people of color , but the fact is that they don ’ t have very many students of color , which is why we end up with this photoshopping .\nI ’ d suggest , though , that a more honest approach is better , backed up with a real economic commitment . What that might look like is a college that says , “ We care about diversity and we know we need to do better . That is why we are offering 50 full-tuition scholarships to people who will bring diversity , including but not limited to racial diversity , to our campus . ”\nI think people would find something honest and substantive like that very refreshing .\nIs the problem , then , a superficial commitment to diversity , in which nonwhiteness is just a commodity , a way for white people to profit from a loose affiliation with nonwhiteness ?\nYes . I think the superficiality is part of the problem . If you want to do something good for nonwhite people , put some real resources into it .\nDo you think our societal effort to promote diversity has had the unintentional effect of degrading nonwhiteness ?\nMaybe . If nonwhiteness is just a commodity that can be bought and sold , isn ’ t it just like cereal or ballpoint pens or anything else you can buy and sell ? I worry that people look at nonwhiteness as just another thing to acquire . You want some nonwhite friends at your party , just like you want great lighting and fancy decorations .\nThis is the question that keeps me up at night . I think the example I gave earlier relating to college recruiting highlights two things that will help : honesty and resources . If a school wants more students of color , it should come out and say so , and then show it ’ s sincere by putting some money into the problem .\nOur country is going down the wrong road when it comes to race . We have a president who is a consummate racial capitalist . He goes out of his way to tweet photos of himself with Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas in the Oval Office , yet he hasn ’ t appointed a single black woman to the federal judiciary , constantly vilifies brown immigrants , and called white supremacists in Charlottesville “ very fine people. ” You couldn ’ t find a clearer example of the divide between show and substance . As a country , we are getting hung up on the show and missing the mark when it comes to the substance .\nIn 2018 , a poll found that 64 percent of Americans think racism is still a major problem in American society and politics . Another 30 percent think racism is a problem . So almost everyone agrees that race relations in America are troubled . But glossy brochures with photos of smiling , racially diverse people aren ’ t going to heal our culture .\nWe need to come up with real , substantive solutions — not use racial capitalism as a way of avoiding the hard questions .


The corporate world , perceived by social activists as the belly of the capitalist beast , might have been expected to be the most difficult for left-wing activists to tame . On the contrary , it has been a soft target .\nOn August 20 , the Wall Street Journal reported that the Business Roundtable , which includes the chief executives of many of the largest U.S. corporations , has ruled it no longer considers the purpose of a corporation to obtain profits for its shareholders but instead to act in accordance with the interests of “ all stakeholders , ” that is , society in general — which in practice means in accordance with social activists ’ enthusiasms of the day .\nThis can only make even more difficult the life of Justin Danhof , the lone ranger trying to restore the concept of traditional fiduciary responsibility to corporations steadily lurching leftward . The outcome of that effort will have a major impact on the many millions of Americans who depend in their retirement on funds that have been invested in the market .\nDanhof directs the Free Enterprise Project at the National Center for Public Policy Research . According to Danhof , the National Center was founded in 1982 by Amy Moritz Ridenour with “ a really great mission ” — to be a voice for the conservative movement wherever the movement was quiet . And it has certainly been quiet when it comes to countering the coordinated pressure campaign on corporations to adopt the Left ’ s positions on so-called ESG ( environmental , social , and governance ) issues , and , in the last few years , to dissociate from any pro-business organizations .\nIn a recent conference call organized by Steve Soukup of the Political Forum , Danhof called the landscape in which he operates “ ridiculous. ” There are 80 to 90 left-wing groups , most part of the As You Sow network , coordinating shareholder resolutions , while he is the lone shareholder trying to hold the fort on the conservative side . Working 80 hours a week , he says he can file 20 shareholder resolutions a year as against the 400 to 500 a year the Left files annually . While Danhof did not single it out , the example of the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility highlights the imbalance . Created by the National Council of Churches in 1971 , its first high-profile target was the Nestlé Corporation for its marketing of infant formula in the third world . ( The Interfaith Center argued breastfeeding was much less expensive , healthier , and more appropriate for third-world mothers. ) . Today the Interfaith Center boasts of filing 300 resolutions a year and representing $ 200 billion in investor capital .\nFor 10 years Danhof has struggled to get companies “ back to neutral , ” meaning out of social and cultural battles that have nothing to do with their businesses . His task was made immeasurably harder a few years ago when Institutional Shareholder Services ( ISS ) and Glass Lewis , which together comprise 97 percent of the market for proxy advisory services , shifted to the left and began supporting ESG proposals . Danhof reports a recent example of what he calls “ the black-and-white nature of their bias. ” Shareholder activist groups have been pushing affirmative action policies , supported by ISS and Glass Lewis , for appointments to corporate boards . But when he introduced shareholder resolutions calling for increased viewpoint diversity on corporate boards , both ISS and Glass Lewis opposed him .\nGiven that so many institutional investors — including public service union pension , BlackRock , and Vanguard funds — outsource their votes to the proxy advisors , their recommendations have a huge impact . Before the proxy advisors ’ leftward shift , says Danhof , shareholder resolutions , whether his or those of “ progressive ” opponents , typically received only 2 to 3 percent of shareholder votes . But with the support of proxy advisors , last year the Wall Street Journal reported the median level of support for the left ’ s ESG proposals rose to 24 percent .\nThat ’ s only part of the story . The groups advancing these resolutions seek to negotiate an agreement with the company before they get on a proxy statement , and , indeed , the Journal reported in the same article that 48 percent of ESG proposals filed in 2018 were withdrawn . Generally a withdrawal means the company preemptively caved to the Left ’ s demands .\nTo be sure , in many cases , executives and corporate boards are in sympathy with the activists . This is increasingly the case now that some of the search firms used by Fortune 500 companies , says Danhof , only identify liberal candidates for open board spots . The global warming apocalypse , the focus of much of the environmental proposals , doubtless has plenty of board-room believers . To a large extent , says Danhof , the corporation is turning into the college campus , run by liberals , for liberals .\nEgged on by their own success , activists in the last few years have pressed corporate America to dissociate from pro-business organizations . Danhof describes the activists ’ modus operandi in the case of the American Legislative Exchange Council ( ALEC ) , which works on model legislation to reduce the regulatory burden on corporate America .\nBecause ALEC worked at one point on voter ID legislation — beyond the pale in the leftist worldview — the activists declared ALEC “ racist ” and flooded corporations with shareholder resolutions declaring they should not belong to ALEC because of “ reputational risk. ” That it was a circular argument — the activists decried ALEC as racist without evidence and then those same activists insisted corporations must not put their reputations at risk by belonging to it — did nothing to impair its effectiveness , Danhof notes . One hundred eighteen corporations left ALEC as a result of the campaign . The success of this smear tactic has provided the activists with a model to use against any trade group they choose to target . The corporations that weakly caved on ALEC , says Danhof , are now bombarded with proposals to leave the Chamber of Commerce , the National Association of Manufacturers , and even the National Restaurant Association ( dubbed by activists “ the other NRA ” ) .\nThe “ index ” is another device the activists employ to great effect as both carrot and stick . The CPA-Zicklin Index , for example , is the product of the Center for Political Accountability at the University of Pennsylvania ’ s Wharton School . Funded by George Soros and ostensibly seeking to ensure transparency in the political activity of corporations , the index is used as a stick to keep corporations from engaging with groups like ALEC and the Chamber of Commerce , Danhof says .\nThen there ’ s the Corporate Equality Index , produced by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation ( HRC ) to rate American businesses on their treatment of gay , lesbian , bisexual , and transgender individuals . Danhof says he can ’ t tell you how many shareholder meetings he ’ s attended in which the company has boasted about its perfect score on the Corporate Equality Index .\nBut the HRC keeps moving the goalposts . Danhof reports that about three years ago the HRC tweaked the index to demand an “ outward-facing ” event promoting the LGBTQ community each year . If not , the company would forfeit 10 percent on its score . This , he explains , accounts for the recent plethora of LGBTQ Super Bowl ads replacing the humorous ones to which viewers were happily accustomed . The HRC subsequently upped the demand to three “ outward-facing events ” annually . Last year , Danhof says , the Corporate Equality Index was tweaked yet again : if a company opposed a shareholder proposal that the HRC supports , the company would automatically lose 25 percent on the index .\nCorporations not only bend quickly under pressure but also produce the desired results much more quickly than courts or legislatures . Danhof offers as an example the fate of Georgia ’ s 2016 “ religious freedom ” bill , which affirmed the rights of those who opposed same-sex marriage on religious grounds to withhold services . Both houses of the Republican legislature passed the bill , which needed only the ( willing ) Republican Gov . Nathan Deal ’ s signature . The activists could have launched legal challenges , but that would have taken years with uncertain results . Instead the liberal activist network flew into action . Georgia was hoping to be selected to host the Super Bowl in 2019 or 2020 , and the National Football League announced it would be out of the running if the governor signed the bill into law . AMC Networks announced it would not film the seventh season of its hit series The Walking Dead in Georgia , and Disney threatened to stop all filming in Georgia . Gov . Deal did not sign the bill .\nWhile the liberal activist network mobilizes the troops , Danhof notes that those who oppose some of the most flagrant corporate decisions — like the decision by Nike to ditch its sneakers with the Betsy Ross flag because Colin Kaepernick told them to do so — confine themselves to personal expressions of outrage on Twitter .\nWith corporations , including the country ’ s largest , lining up to throw out traditional notions of fiduciary responsibility to shareholders in favor of responsibility to everyone and everything up to and including the planet ( reversing climate change is a favorite cause of the activists ) , is there anything that can be done to reverse the anti-business tide that has taken root within the corporations themselves ? At the outset , conservatives must finally begin to take notice and address the problem seriously .\nDanhof says that over the past five years he has personally attended more than 150 shareholder meetings , filed over 130 shareholder resolutions , and had over 200 meetings with corporate executives . His law degree comes in handy as he also does all the legal battling , much of it involving corporate filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission . But however admirable the lone ranger is ( Danhof has an occasional Tonto who will go to a shareholder meeting for him if in the event of schedule conflicts ) , he can not carry the day alone against the activist behemoth .\nDanhof offers a host of measures that conservatives could and should take . They can start their own rating systems to counter the activist indexes . Why , he asks , are companies rated on how much they promote the LGBTQ community while there is no liberty rating system ? Why isn ’ t the Heritage Foundation rating companies on cronyism ? Why isn ’ t the NRA rating companies on how they engage in Second Amendment issues ?\nHow about developing fast-action social media response teams to counter the Left ’ s outrage machine , which so often produces corporate action ? That way conservative anger would not be dissipated in ineffective bursts of emotion on Twitter .\nDanhof says there should also be an effort to elevate business-minded conservatives to corporate boards rather than leaving the shaping of these boards to people like Eric Holder , who is currently working to get as many former Obama people as possible on corporate boards .\nThere should be an effort to engage corporate managers . Even those sympathetic to favored activist causes can be persuaded , Danhof believes , that it is in their interest to keep power and control over decisions , not to outsource them to groups that don ’ t care about their shareholders and in many cases would shut down the business tomorrow ( think fossil fuels ) if they could . He urges them : Don ’ t adopt a policy based on flawed studies that made it into a shareholder resolution .\nMost important of all , according to Danhof , is finding a way to deal with the radicalized proxy advisors , which he calls an existential threat . If he had a silver bullet , he says he would buy the Institutional Shareholder Services because its role in increasing the impact of the shareholder resolution can not be overstated .\nOne piece of good news is that the SEC has finally issued new guidance limiting the usefulness ( and thus the power ) of the proxy advisor . No longer will investment advisors be able to simply outsource their recommendations to the proxy ; they will still be responsible for doing their own due diligence . And the proxy advisors will now be legally on the hook for false and misleading communications . While Danhof does not believe the SEC rulings will have much impact in the short term , the Wall Street Journal in an August 28 editorial treats this ruling as a significant sign the SEC is looking out for shareholders , not political stakeholders .\nOrganized advocacy of “ stakeholder ” over shareholder rights is relatively new , going back to the Ralph Nader-created and inspired so-called “ public interest ” groups of the 1960s , which sought to politicize the corporation by turning it into a miniature government whose decisions were to be made by a “ legislature ” that included the public affected by the corporation . At the time this was dismissed as fringe chatter . Now that the vast majority of the corporate leaders of the Business Roundtable have adopted the then-far-out notion of satisfying the “ stakeholder ” as their central mission , many in the media simply shrug , dismissing it as inconsequential window dressing . In the Hill , Danhof points out that , on the contrary , the Roundtable has provided “ the rope that the Left can use to put around the necks of its corporate members. ” Indeed he envisions shareholder proposals being fashioned right now demanding Roundtable member companies leave the Roundtable because some of its pro-business advocacy is contrary to the positions of some ESG “ stakeholders . ”\nThe notion that stakeholders trump a corporation ’ s shareholders may be new . Much older is the pithy observation of Adam Smith in An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations that “ I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good . ”\nRael Jean Isaac is the author ( with Erich Isaac ) of The Coercive Utopians : Social Deception by America ’ s Power Players ( Regnery ) and ( with Virginia Armat ) Madness in the Streets : How Psychiatry and the Law Abandoned the Mentally Ill ( The Free Press ) .


PepsiCo CEO Indra Nooyi will step down after 12 years leading the food and beverage giant , ending a tenure marked by efforts to adapt to changing consumer tastes and fending off pressure from activist investors .\nPresident Ramon Laguarta , 54 , will succeed the 62-year-old Nooyi effective Oct. 3 , becoming Pepsi 's sixth CEO . Nooyi will remain as chairman until early 2019 .\n`` Growing up in India , I never imagined I 'd have the opportunity to lead such an extraordinary company , '' Nooyi said in a statement . `` PepsiCo today is in a strong position for continued growth with its brightest days still ahead . ''\nPepsi stock gained cumulatively 79 percent since she assumed the CEO role in October 2006 , according to FactSet . That 's less than both the S & P 500 , which gained 112 percent , and Coca-Cola , which gained 108 percent . It grew net revenue from $ 35 billion in 2006 to $ 63.5 billion in 2017 .\nIt also faced challenges from upstart brands that continue to threaten its market share , including once-dominant drinks like Gatorade . Pepsi 's North American beverage business has been more challenged than its stalwart snacking business , continuing to provoke questions about whether the giant would consider splitting the two .\nActivist investor Nelson Peltz had taken a stake in the Pepsi and pushed for a split of the two businesses before backing off and exiting the company in 2016 after a multi-year battle .\nUnder Nooyi , Pepsi steadfastly kept the two businesses together , arguing in favor of the combined leverage it gives the company over retailers . It sought to revive its North American drink business by throwing more support behind its core brands . It said it erred in giving up prime shelf space in favor of supporting its younger drinks and lagging behind Coca-Cola in advertising spend .\nEfforts to reinvigorate its largest brands include its Pepsi Generation advertising campaign , the re-release of Mountain Dew Baja Blast and the launch of calorie-free Gatorade Zero .\nIt has also continued to support its snack business , announcing in May the acquisition of baked fruit and vegetable company Bare Foods . The deal may also serve as a building base for the broader business of plant-based snacks .\nNooyi is the second female CEO of a food and beverage company to leave the post since May , following Campbell Soup 's Denise Morrison . She is also the latest in a growing list of departures of chief executives across the food and beverage industry , as it faces the unprecedented challenge of remaking decades-old companies under the glare of the public eye .\nLaguarta , a 22-year veteran of the company , has been president since September , overseeing global operations , corporate strategy , public policy and government affairs . Prior to that , Laguarta served in leadership positions in the European and sub-Saharan Africa divisions .\nThe international markets have been a strong point for Pepsi amid slowing growth and tougher retailers in countries like the U.S. Pepsi this quarter reported 7 percent organic revenue growth in Europe Sub-Saharan Africa and 6 percent growth in Asia , Middle East & North Africa .\nWith Nooyi 's departure , the rest of PepsiCo 's senior leadership team will remain unchanged , the company said .


Amazon ’ s decision to raise workers ’ minimum wage to $ 15 per hour was welcome news , even Sen. Bernie Sanders praised the move .\nBut for some Amazon employees , the excitement didn ’ t last very long as they learned that existing financial incentives and bonus programs , including stock and monthly bonuses , that usually boost paychecks will be eliminated starting November 1 .\nSeveral Amazon warehouse workers in the U.S. , who spoke to Yahoo Finance on the condition of anonymity fearing reprisals , talked about how the change will negatively affect them . After the removal of these perks , some workers said they will be making less . Most of the workers who voiced concerns have been working for the company for more than two years , and have been earning close to $ 15 an hour before the raise .\nWhile these workers ’ hourly rates will rise modestly , they said they could lose thousands of dollars that they would have collected from the stock and monthly-bonus programs . Amazon said those who are already making $ 15 an hour will see an increase in pay but did not specify how much .\nAn employee earning $ 15.25 an hour who has worked for Amazon for more than three years in Arizona crunched the numbers . Although he is getting a $ 1 an hour raise , which would equate to as much as $ 2,080 in additional pay a year , he said he could have earned a few thousands of dollars more from the incentive programs . “ Amazon isn ’ t giving its employees a raise , they ’ re taking money from us , ” he told Yahoo Finance . “ It only looks good if folks don ’ t know the truth . ”\nAn Amazon spokesperson said “ all hourly operations and customer service employees will see an increase in their total compensation as a result of this announcement . In addition , because it ’ s no longer incentive-based , the compensation will be more immediate and predictable . ”\nNot everyone at Amazon is happy about the wage increase . ( photo credit/Time ) More\nIn the past , Amazon had used stock options as a major selling point during the recruiting process . “ One of the ways we foster ownership among employees is through Restricted Stock Unit ( RSU ) awards . RSUs are a key part of our global compensation program , which has been carefully designed to help us attract , motivate and retain employees of the highest caliber , ” according to an Amazon brochure about the program .\nUnder RSUs , full-time warehouse workers usually receive two or three shares each year after a two-year vesting period . Amazon stock ( AMZN ) has been on a bull run — the share price has more than tripled since 2016 and now is around $ 2,000 . Amazon said it ’ ll replace RSU with a “ direct stock purchase plan ” but didn ’ t offer any specifics .\nAnother major perk that Amazon is phasing out is employee ’ s monthly bonuses , called Variable Compensation Pay ( VCP ) . An employee can earn up to 8 % of their monthly income , but it depends on how many hours they work and the facility site ’ s production goals . An average worker usually receives $ 1,800 to $ 3,000 a year through the VCP program , according to employees who talked to Yahoo Finance . Some said it ’ s especially frustrating to see the program removed now , since VCP doubles during peak months in the holiday season .\nAmazon warehouse employees go wild as news breaks of the company ’ s new $ 15 minimum wage . ( Screenshot/Youtube ) More\nAmazon said its decision to eliminate the financial incentive program was based on employees ’ feedback . “ We ’ ve heard from our hourly fulfillment and customer service employees that they prefer the predictability and immediacy of cash to RSUs , ” the company wrote in a blog post . “ The net effect of this change and the new higher cash compensation is significantly more total compensation for employees , without any vesting requirements , and with more predictability . ”


Apple CEO Tim Cook stands in front of a depiction of the new Apple headquarters building in Cupertino , Calif. , in 2016 . ( Stephen Lam/Reuters )\nOur politicians reliably fetishize two constituents of American life : the middle class and small business . The Democrats used to talk a bit more about the poor before they became the Harvard party — poor people are lousy donors , as it turns out — and the Republicans used to be a lot warmer toward Big Business before the GOP became a right-wing farmer-labor party and Big Business came to mean Howard Schultz , Mark Zuckerberg , and Lloyd Blankfein .\nBut the fact is , America needs Big Business — maybe more than Big Business needs America . There are lots of markets out there .\nThe relationship between Big Business and small business is complicated . Big Business now employs the majority of American workers , and a lot of small-business employees are Big Business employees at one degree of separation , working for smaller firms that get most — or all — of their sales from a single client , usually a much larger firm . The textbook example is the automotive industry , in which smaller companies provide specialized components and services to the big marques . Which is to say , Big Business relies on smaller businesses for inputs — about 25 percent of the inputs for big U.S. businesses are supplied by small U.S. businesses , according to a Business Roundtable study .\nIt is a delicate ecosystem , and the political desire to lean toward one group of businesses at the expense of others — for reasons that have a lot more to do with rhetoric than with economics — helps no one .\n“ Job creation ” is a questionable metric — abolishing high-tech agricultural equipment would create a lot of jobs but leave us no better off — but the numbers are worth appreciating : The biggest 1 percent of U.S. companies create about a third of the new long-term jobs . Big is beautiful , and so is new : Successful startups have for years made the difference between positive and negative net job growth in the United States . Big businesses pay better , offer better benefits , and offer more-stable long-term employment than their smaller cousins . And the small businesses that have the biggest impact on wealth , wages , and employment are the little ones that end up being big ones : Apple , Google , Microsoft , Facebook , Amazon .\nThe good news is : We ’ re really good at making Big Business work , and making it work for us . Just how good we are at that is something few Americans appreciate .\nOf the world ’ s 100 most valuable companies , the majority — 54 — are domiciled in the United States , according to a PwC report . Nobody else is even close : No . 2 is China , with a bare dozen . The United Kingdom boasts five . In 2009 , Japan was home to six of the world ’ s 100 largest companies . Today , it is home to one . Continental Europe combined has only 16 of the largest 100 : four in Germany , four in France , three in Switzerland , two in Spain , and one each for Belgium , the Netherlands , and Denmark .\nMost of those big European companies have something in common : They are elderly . The biggest U.S. firms are relatively new high-tech companies : Apple , Facebook , Alphabet , Microsoft , with only a few old-school companies such as Johnson & Johnson and JPMorgan near the top of the list . Europe ’ s biggest companies are corporate geezers such as Unilever , Nestlé , and Roche . Quick : What ’ s the most important German technology startup from a global point of view ? Daimler ? Bosch ? Some other 19th-century company ?\nThere are no European companies — zero — in the top ten worldwide , eight of which are U.S. firms .\nThe United States is home to the biggest , most valuable companies , which are getting bigger and more valuable faster than those in any other country . The market-valuation gains for those U.S. companies amounted to $ 1.3 trillion in just one year , from 2017 to 2018 . Of the 20 companies worldwide that saw the largest market-cap gains from 2017 to 2018 , 13 were U.S. companies . Zero were European companies . Zero were Latin American companies . Zero were Canadian companies . Zero were Middle Eastern , Japanese , Indian , or South Korean companies .\nFrom the 2008–09 financial crisis to 2018 , the U.S. firms in the top 100 worldwide added about $ 8.6 trillion in value — nearly five times what their Chinese counterparts did and 28 times what those of Europe ’ s best performer , Switzerland , added in the same period . The big U.S. firms added 41 times as much value as those of the vaunted economic powerhouse of Germany . Of the 20 firms worldwide that added the most value in those years , 15 were U.S. firms . One — Anheuser-Busch InBev of Belgium — was in Europe . Only two were in China .\nEuropean firms show up on the list of companies that lost the most value in that period : Roche , Sanofi , Siemens . So do a bunch of rickety old American companies : General Electric , AT & T , Procter & Gamble , Walt Disney , IBM , Philip Morris , and PepsiCo .\nRobert D. Atkinson and Michael Lind make the case for bigness in Big Is Beautiful : Debunking the Myth of Small Business , reviewed in these pages in May by Cato ’ s Ike Brannon , who notes the authors find that Big Business has “ proven to be better at achieving all that both the Left and the Right deem important to the U.S. economy : Big businesses pay higher wages , provide better benefits , have higher worker productivity and more innovation , do more research and development , export more , and achieve more in terms of environmental protection , worker safety , training , tenure , and diversity . In short , if the Left and the Right were to examine business solely by outcomes , both would more forcefully advocate that the government do more for big business . ”\nBut Big Business doesn ’ t so need a positive advocate in government — the absence of outright active hostility toward big , globe-bestriding firms probably would do . The members of the 2020 Democratic field are at the moment feverishly trying to out-radical one another when it comes to class warfare : Senator Warren proposes gradually expropriating the assets of wealthy Americans , Senator Harris talks about raising corporate taxes , and Senator Sanders — well , Comrade Muppet , the reddest Brooklyn socialist ever to represent Vermont , will never change . ( Except on immigration . Don ’ t ask him about those 2016 union-hall meetings ! ) Newbies such as Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Representative Ilhan Omar debate among themselves whether taxes should be jacked up to 70 percent or 90 percent and about exactly how the U.S. energy and manufacturing sectors should be put out of business . ( Green New Deal , indeed . ) Poor old Howard Schultz ( I. , Frappuccino ) is a candidate for crucifixion . The Democrats positively bristle with resentment .\nBig Business is not without its sins . But between Big Business and Big Envy , the choice is not difficult . Envy never put any bread on the table . Capital just wants to be loved , and it will go where it is loved . The blessings of Big Business are invisible to Americans for the same reason water is invisible to fish — but we ’ ll miss them when they ’ re gone .


San Francisco is one of America 's richest cities , yet it has a major problem with homelessness and crime . An average of 85 cars are broken into daily , yet fewer than 2 percent lead to arrests .\nThe homeless themselves are often harassed . `` They run around and they shout at themselves , '' one man who usually sleeps on the streets told our crew . `` They make it bad for people like us that hang out with a sign . ''\nSince store owners ca n't rely on city cops for help , some have hired private police to patrol their stores . There used to be hundreds of these private cops citiwide—and then the city 's police union complained . There are fewer than 10 left .\nSan Francisco 's politicians have promised to help the homeless going back decades . In 1982 , Mayor Dianne Feinstein bragged about creating `` a thousands units right here in the Tenderloin . '' In 2002 , Mayor Willie Brown said `` you got ta do something about it . '' In 2008 , Mayor Gavin Newsom boasted about moving `` 6,860 human beings off the street . '' In 2018 , San Francisco passed a new local tax to help pay for homeless services .\nWhy have the results been so lackluster ? One ███ : San Francisco has the nation 's highest rents .\nLaura Foote runs the non-profit `` YIMBY Action , '' which stands for `` yes in my backyard . '' The organization promotes policies that encourage more housing construction as a way to bring down prices .\n`` Let me build , '' said developer John Dennis . He spent years trying to get permission to replace a graffiti-covered , long-defunct meat-packing plant with a 60-unit building . He eventually got permission—but it took 4 years .\n`` And all that time , we 're paying property taxes and we 're paying for maintenance of the building , '' Dennis told Stossel .\nThe views expressed in this video are solely those of John Stossel ; his independent production company , Stossel Productions ; and the people he interviews . The claims and opinions set forth in the video and accompanying text are not necessarily those of ███ .


'T is the season of joyful children , the unfortunate addition of candy canes to coffee drinks , and fancy DVD sets given by people who apparently are n't aware of streaming video . And also , pleas to help the homeless .\nThe way that last part repeats , year after year , can make it seem like homelessness is an entrenched , unchanging part of our society . But data from recent years shows the nature of the problem is shifting dramatically before our eyes .\nAccording to HUD , the number of people on the streets and in shelters on a single night in January has fallen for the past four years straight . Even more remarkably , the category that HUD terms chronic homelessness — people with mental or physical disabilities living without a home for extended periods , or repeatedly — has dropped 30 percent since 2007 , even as the nation went through a severe recession .\nBut there 's also another story about homelessness in America , told by a report from the National Center for Family Homelessness , that shows a record number of children are now homeless . That 's based on data from the Department of Education , which measures homelessness quite differently from HUD . Instead of just surveying streets and shelters , the DOE includes anyone who 's living doubled-up , couch-surfing with friends or extended family . Because of that , the scale of the problem depends on which source you 're looking at — almost 1.3 million homeless students by the DOE 's count , compared with HUD 's point-in-time estimate of 578,424 homeless people of all ages .\nStill , the way the two sets of numbers are trending reflects something kind of mind-boggling : As a nation , we may be on our way to solving the problem of homelessness for the toughest people to serve . Yet , at the same time , homelessness is on the rise among a separate group of people , with problems that seem , on the surface , much simpler .\nThat veteran who used to sleep under a bridge ? There 's a good chance he now has his own place , with access to health care and counseling . But meanwhile , a mom with a couple of kids down the street has moved in with her sister 's family , and one more fight over shared bedrooms could send them looking for somewhere else to stay .\nThe improvement in chronic homelessness is thanks largely to the adoption of `` housing first '' approaches that give people a place to live and then offer help with substance abuse and disabilities . Research has found this works much better than trying to offer services to people on the street before finding them housing . Over the past decade , groups working with the homeless have responded to the data and shifted gears .\n`` We 've gotten a lot better across the board , I think , with people with very special needs , '' said Nan Roman , president and CEO of the National Alliance to End Homelessness . `` There 's kind of a technology around that , permanent supportive housing . It turns out it 's really cost effective . ''\nLooking at recent victories , like the fact that both New York and New Orleans have cut veteran homelessness in half in just three years , Roman said she 's cautiously optimistic that homelessness among people with the greatest needs could be entirely eliminated .\nBut she said addressing homelessness among families is a whole different matter . Homeless families , mainly women and their kids , don ’ t experience mental health and substance abuse problems at anywhere near the rates of homeless individuals , so they don ’ t really need the same types of supports . In fact , homeless families look almost exactly like other low-income families .\n`` What you 're seeing is this massive pool of poor people who ca n't afford housing , '' Roman said . `` Some percent every year will have a crisis and fall into homelessness… . This is not really about homelessness ; this is about resolving housing crises for poor people . There 's going to be more of it because we 're just not dealing with the income-housing gap — people not having a living wage . ''\nEven though homelessness driven by economic need seems like a simpler problem than the chronic sort , it could be much harder to solve . Only a certain number of people live with serious disabilities . But , as pay rates at the lowest rungs of the economy stagnate , there are an almost unlimited number who could end up evicted after a few more rent hikes .\nThis is n't to say that no progress has been made in fighting family homelessness . Nationwide , by HUD 's count , the number of parents and kids living on the street is less than half what it was in 2007 , and the number in shelters has n't grown enough to account for this drop .\nMary Cunningham , a senior research associate at the Urban Institute 's Metropolitan Housing and Communities Center , said it 's not altogether clear where those families go when they leave the street . In some cases , they may be getting support from various agencies to help them stay in their own apartments .\nBut there 's also a suggestive bit of data in the HUD numbers : While family homelessness has generally fallen , there are a few places it 's risen steeply . In Washington , D.C. , HUD reports that the number of homeless parents and children rose from 1,603 in 2007 to 3,795 this year . In New York City , it jumped from 29,015 to 41,633 .\nRents in these cities are extraordinarily high , and rising fast , which may partly explain why they stand out . But Cunningham notes that there 's another difference . Both D.C. and New York have an unusual law guaranteeing a shelter bed to anyone who needs it — at least in dangerously cold weather . That means families that might otherwise be doubled-up or living in some other makeshift situation are more likely to end up in a shelter and get counted as officially homeless .\nPerhaps partly because of their right-to-shelter laws , Cunningham said , some shelters in the two cities have evolved to look kind of like very low-quality apartments .\n`` So in some ways the shelter has become de facto affordable housing for people who do n't have other options , '' she said . `` That is n't great because the quality is n't there . ''\nBut are these shelters worse than the alternative ? That 's not clear . Cunningham said that , in cities without the right to shelter , more doubling up may create other problems , including a stressful environment for everyone involved .\n`` Those are not healthy situations either , '' she said . `` It makes it hard for kids to go to school , stay on track in class . ''\nSakina Thompson , senior policy advisor for D.C. 's Department of Human Services , said the city has recently moved toward combining programs for families that are officially homeless and those that are simply poor , recognizing that they typically have the same needs .\n`` Families seeking homeless services look just like the families who don ’ t who also have low income , '' she said .\nFor example , Thompson said , city workers now assess the housing needs of every family that applies for the welfare program Temporary Assistance for Needy Families . It turns out that more than half of them are doubled-up and at risk of homelessness . Now the city can connect them with housing resources before they end up in a shelter .\nThe question is whether D.C. , and other high-cost communities , can provide enough support to keep families in their own apartments .\nThe largest federal affordable housing program for low-income people is Section 8 subsidies , which pay a portion of a household 's rent each month . But there are a limited number of the vouchers , and only a quarter of eligible families nationwide receive them . D.C. also has various affordable housing programs of its own , but Thompson said these resources are just not enough . The city 's housing authority had to close its wait list for public housing a year and a half ago because it had gotten so long .\nThe mismatch between affordable housing and the people who need it is only getting worse . Nationwide , more than a quarter of renters pay 50 percent or more of their income in rent , and the percentage has risen substantially in recent years .\n`` That puts people at higher risk , '' said Cunningham . `` If you 're paying too much for housing , you 're either making very difficult trade-offs about what else you 're forgoing , like food or health care , or you 're falling behind on your rent and you 're putting yourself at risk for becoming homeless . ''\nSo if we want to help the homeless this Christmas , the best thing we can do might be to work for justice for all Americans living with those choices .


The US Department of Agriculture runs a housing program for low-income residents in rural areas that is shrinking , even as the need expands . Two reports this year found that the program – housing an estimated 435,000 people – faces a dark future . In the early 1960s , federal lawmakers directed the USDA to create and expand low-income housing for the country ’ s large rural population by extending 30- to 50-year loans to developers to build multifamily dwellings outside urban areas . But the agency ends rental assistance when property owners fulfill their loan obligations , and the loss of subsidies leads most of them to leave the program and raise rents . “ In many small communities , these properties are the only kind of affordable housing , ” says Lance George of the Housing Assistance Council in Washington , D.C. “ If they disappear , there are no other options. ” His concern is echoed by Kathleen Griffin , who lives in an apartment subsidized by the USDA in Winters , Calif. “ Without this building and without the rent help , I ’ m not sure how I ’ d get by , ” she says .\nThe town of Winters lies 30 miles from California ’ s capital of Sacramento and half that far from three other cities with a combined population of almost a quarter-million people . Despite its proximity to urban areas , Winters , with 7,300 residents , qualifies as a rural area under federal guidelines , and like small towns across the state and country , it faces an acute shortage of affordable housing .\nThe municipality has designated 235 housing units for low-income residents . Six apartment complexes account for that total , including Winters Senior Apartments , where Kathleen Griffin moved in three years ago .\nThe two-story , 38-unit building , tucked into a leafy neighborhood a few blocks from the city ’ s tidy downtown , provides subsidized housing through the US Department of Agriculture ( USDA ) . The agency ’ s rural housing service supplies financial aid to low-income tenants that typically covers 70 percent of their rent .\nFor Ms. Griffin , who pays a third of the $ 820 monthly rent on her one-bedroom apartment , the assistance enabled her to return to her hometown and look after her elderly mother , who lives nearby . Before the unit opened at the Winters complex , she had languished for months on the waiting list of another subsidized apartment building while she stayed with a relative .\n“ We feel a little forgotten here in rural America , ” Griffin says . A retired mental health counselor , she copes with severe neck , back , and knee pain and survives on a monthly $ 1,000 disability payment . “ Without this building and without the rent help , I ’ m not sure how I ’ d get by . ”\nHousing advocates across the country share a similar concern , as the precarious state of low-income housing in rural areas threatens to deteriorate over the next decade – and from there descend into a full-blown crisis .\nThe USDA ’ s rental housing inventory comprises 416,000 subsidized units with an estimated 435,000 residents . Two reports this year found that , in the absence of more federal funding and better planning , the program will shed some 20,000 units by 2027 . At that point , analysts predict , the loss rate will accelerate through 2050 with up to another 380,000 units expected to exit the program , gutting the overall supply by 90 percent or more .\n“ We want to sound the alarm , ” says Lance George , director of research for the Housing Assistance Council , a nonprofit advocacy and policy group based in Washington , D.C. , that conducted one of the studies . “ In many small communities , these properties are the only kind of affordable housing . If they disappear , there are no other options . ”\nThe separate reports from the council and the Government Accountability Office identify maturing mortgages and early repayment of loans on USDA properties as the primary causes of the program ’ s troubles . The agency has seen its housing stock decrease by 29,000 low-income units in the past decade and has lacked funding to build new housing since 2011 .\nThe projected drop-off in affordable housing would hit hardest in the Midwest and Southeast , where two-thirds of the agency ’ s properties are located . At the same time , California could lose nearly 27,000 units , more than any other state .\nThe country ’ s most populous state seldom receives mention in discussions of rural issues , and likewise , the plight of rural areas seldom receives mention in discussions of California ’ s affordable housing shortage . Yet advocates warn of the fallout in Winters and other small towns statewide if the USDA program unravels .\n“ The impact will be gigantic , ” says Rob Wiener , executive director of the California Coalition for Rural Housing in Sacramento . “ Without these properties , those residents will have nowhere to live . ”\nThe problems plaguing the USDA ’ s rural housing service trace to its origins in the early 1960s . Federal lawmakers directed the agency to create and expand low-income housing for the country 's large rural population by extending 30- to 50-year loans to developers to build multifamily dwellings outside urban areas .\nThe program gained momentum in 1978 when the agency began offering rental assistance to tenants and limited their monthly payments to 30 percent of their adjusted income . The USDA picks up the difference , ensuring an equitable return to landlords on occupied units .\nThe subsidies spurred construction of low-income housing through the 1990s , and the USDA now manages properties in more than 85 percent of US counties . The units alleviate a profound need . The average income of tenants falls below $ 14,000 , and almost two-thirds are seniors , disabled , or both .\nBut the demand for affordable housing contrasts with the thinning supply as property owners pay off their USDA loans . The agency ends rental assistance when property owners fulfill their loan obligations , and the loss of subsidies leads most of them to leave the program and raise rents , an increase that can force out residents on fixed incomes .\n“ Homelessness in rural areas isn ’ t usually as visible as it is in cities , ” Mr. Wiener says . “ What ’ s already happening is more people are couch surfing with neighbors or relatives or living in cars or RVs as more of the affordable housing is going away . ”\nSome 3 million renter households in California – more than half the statewide total – meet the federal standard of “ rent-burdened , ” spending at least a third of their income on housing . The figure includes 550,000 low-income seniors , and those living in rural areas could be imperiled by the USDA ’ s shrinking housing inventory .\n“ They are the most vulnerable , ” says Gideon Anders , a senior staff attorney with the National Housing Law Project in San Francisco . “ People who are 70 or 80 years old and subsisting on Social Security can ’ t afford the market-rate rent in the community . ”\nRents in the state ’ s less populated areas have climbed in recent years as more residents seek to escape the high cost of urban living . The migration of people into towns once considered remote has enticed landlords to hike rents and , in turn , pushed low-income residents closer to the margins .\nGloria Rhodes struggled to find a new home in Winters two years ago after the owner of the guest cottage that she rented for $ 700 a month died . Unable to afford a market-rate apartment in town – monthly rent on a one-bedroom unit averages $ 1,000 – she placed her name on the waiting lists of Winters Senior Apartments and two other low-income housing complexes .\nIn the meantime , Ms. Rhodes , a retired customer service supervisor for a phone company , had to move 30 miles away to the city of Fairfield , where she lived in a cramped apartment in a run-down neighborhood . When a one-bedroom unit finally opened last spring at Winters Senior Apartments , she recalls , “ It felt like I was going to heaven . ”\n“ People talk all the time about the housing crisis in California , ” she says , sitting in her wheelchair in her apartment , the walls decorated with framed photos of her children and grandchildren . “ But when was the last time you heard about what ’ s happening in rural areas ? And especially what ’ s happening with seniors in places like Winters ? It ’ s like we don ’ t exist . ”\nThe USDA mortgage on the Winters complex will mature in 2045 . The distant date holds little relevance for Rhodes and other older tenants . But the prospect of the property one day losing its rental assistance worries Kate Laddish , 48 , who was diagnosed with a complex array of muscle , organ , and neurological disorders that qualify her for disability payments and low-income housing .\nMs. Laddish has lived here since 2006 , and while distinguished by age from most of her neighbors , she shares their gratitude for the stability the housing provides . “ When you ’ re elderly or disabled , you ’ re already coping with uncertainty , so knowing you have a home , a safety net – it ’ s invaluable , ” she says .\nLaddish ’ s condition derailed her career as a college professor and cost her the market-rate apartment where she lived . The rent subsidy enables her to remain close to her doctors and support network , and her experience informs her alarm over the failure of federal officials to address the bleak future of the USDA housing program .\n“ Services for seniors and people with disabilities don ’ t get a lot of attention in Washington , ” she says . “ Poor people can ’ t hire lobbyists . ”\nThe growth of the country ’ s urban population over the past 20 years has siphoned off public and political attention from rural housing concerns . The ticking clock on the USDA ’ s housing loans has gone unheard by federal lawmakers and President Trump , whose inaction follows that of predecessors Barack Obama and George W. Bush .\nThe Housing Assistance Council ’ s report on the program outlines remedies to preserve the supply of properties . The group proposes that the agency offer various tax incentives to landlords to remain in the program and continue rental assistance for tenants after mortgages mature to reduce the odds that owners will convert properties to market-rate housing .\nThe changes would require congressional approval and additional funding . Bob Rapoza , executive secretary of the National Rural Housing Coalition in Washington , worries that ongoing “ bipartisan neglect ” could doom the program ’ s chances of survival . ( USDA officials refused interview requests for this report . )\n“ There is a window of time for Congress to come up with ways to solve this problem . And it is solvable , ” he says . “ But Congress doesn ’ t usually deal with something until it has to . ”\nAnother answer to the program ’ s woes involves transferring properties from private owners to nonprofits , which manage 18 percent of the USDA ’ s affordable housing units nationwide . In northern California , the Community Housing Improvement Program operates three low-income apartment complexes that the USDA subsidizes .\nKris Zappettini , the group ’ s interim president , explains that each one took an average of four years to complete , and she suggests that simplifying the process would draw more nonprofits into the program . “ If it was easier , ” she says , “ everyone would be doing it . ”\nThe declining supply of low-income housing units threatens to obscure a related challenge for the USDA . The agency reported in 2016 that the program needs $ 5.6 billion over the next 20 years to maintain and upgrade its aging properties .\nGet the Monitor Stories you care about delivered to your inbox . By signing up , you agree to our Privacy Policy\nAWI Management Corporation , the owner of Winters Senior Apartments and dozens of other properties in California , Arizona , and Hawaii that are subsidized by the USDA , renovated the complex two years ago . The bright hallways and manicured grounds create a buffer between residents and their economic hardship , giving them a sense of independence .\n“ Apartments like this one allow people to live with dignity , ” Laddish says . “ They can live here and not feel like they ’ re being a burden on anyone . Everyone deserves that . ”


It was another chapter in a dismal saga of Nimbyist urban mismanagement that is crushing American cities . Not-in-my-backyardism is a bipartisan sentiment , but because the largest American cities are populated and run by Democrats — many in states under complete Democratic control — this sort of nakedly exclusionary urban restrictionism is a particular shame of the left .\nThere are many threads in the story of America ’ s increasingly unlivable cities . One continuing tragedy is the decimation of local media and the rise of nationalized politics in its place . In America the “ local ” problems plaguing cities are systematically sidelined by the structure of the national media and government , in which the presidency , the Senate and the Supreme Court are all constitutionally tilted in favor of places where no one lives . ( There are more than twice as many people in my midsize suburban county , Santa Clara , as there are in the entire state of North Dakota , with its two United States senators . )\nThat ’ s why , aside from Elizabeth Warren — who has a plan for housing , as she has a plan for everything — Democrats on the 2020 presidential trail rarely mention their ideas for housing affordability , an issue eating American cities alive . I watched Joe Biden ’ s campaign kick off the other day ; the only house he mentioned was the White House .\nThen there is the refusal on the part of wealthy progressives to live by the values they profess to support at the national level . Creating dense , economically and socially diverse urban environments ought to be a paramount goal of progressivism . Cities are the standard geographical unit of the global economy . Dense urban areas are quite literally the “ real America ” — the cities are where two-thirds of Americans live , and they account for almost all national economic output . Urban areas are the most environmentally friendly way we know of housing lots of people . We can ’ t solve the climate crisis without vastly improving public transportation and increasing urban density . More than that , metropolises are good for the psyche and the soul ; density fosters tolerance , diversity , creativity and progress .


Others argue that “ Biden was almost the only one on the stage who talked like a normal person . There was a point near the end of the debate when he was talking about getting men involved in stopping domestic violence and he said that we need to keep ‘ punching ’ at it… I knew that the twitterati and the analysts would tut tut . Ol ’ Joe is just out of touch ! He doesn ’ t know you can ’ t use words like that . Meanwhile , every non-political junkie watching the debate thought there was nothing wrong with this . Biden was just using ordinary language , not worrying too much if it was fully approved by the woke brigade. ” Kevin Drum , Mother Jones\nRegarding Pelosi , “ [ her ] talents have always lain in the less glamorous , less public side of politics : she is good at whipping up votes in her caucus and she is good at disciplining dissenters . She is good at offering incentives and punishments to get Democratic members of Congress to do what she wants them to do… To rip up the speech on television was a bit of theatricality , sure – a ploy designed to get attention . It also worked . The day after Trump made a long speech full of misinformation that tried to make a case for his re-election , no one is talking about him . Instead we are talking about the speaker of the House . That , too , is a skill , one that Pelosi seems to be honing. ” Moira Donegan , The Guardian\n“ If we ’ re really lucky , this might be the occasion for some significant reform . The absolute minimum that should be done is for Iowa to switch from a caucus to a primary… What would be even better is if we finally took the opportunity to end Iowa ’ s first-in-the-nation status… We have to release ourselves from the tyranny of this state and its stubborn voters . Let me speak for those of us in the other 49 : We ’ re pretty sick and tired of you Iowans telling us how it ’ s so important that you have this privilege for all eternity because you ‘ take it so seriously. ’ If you took it seriously , you wouldn ’ t use this insane voting process . And maybe more than 16 percent of you would actually turn out to vote… No one state deserves the status Iowa took for itself , and it has shown it can ’ t manage it . The country needs to take control of the election out of Iowa ’ s hands. ” Paul Waldman , Washington Post\n“ If Democrats can ever achieve a consensus on housing policy , they can do as they wish at present , since the Donkey Party has supermajorities in both chambers in the legislature . But… suburbanites from both parties are wary of disturbing the status quo … the road to enactment of ‘ upzoning ’ legislation remains rocky and winding . If you ’ re homeless in California , or are struggling to afford a mortgage payment or rent , help is not quite yet on the way. ” Ed Kilgore , New York Magazine\n“ Apartment bans are a case of rich vs. poor , longtime resident vs. newcomer , and , all too often , white vs. black , but they are something else too : generational warfare , a showdown in which older homeowners are telling younger renters that there ’ s no more room . Seen that way , the housing affordability crisis serves as a useful framework for understanding a handful of urgent American issues that have stalled out , particularly intraparty conflicts on the left like those over student debt and climate change… It doesn ’ t feel like an accident that the youngest woman ever elected to Congress has done more to advance climate change discourse in Washington in six months than Democrats have done in a decade… Young people in college , at planning meetings in Palo Alto , or protesting in Dianne Feinstein ’ s office , aren ’ t asking for anything radical—just for what their parents and grandparents already had. ” Henry Grabar , Slate\n“ When the cost of living is taken into account , billionaire-brimming California ranks as the most poverty-stricken state , with a fifth of the population struggling to get by . Since 2010 , migration out of California has surged… At every level of government , our representatives , nearly all of them Democrats , prove inadequate and unresponsive to the challenges at hand . Witness last [ month ] ’ s embarrassment , when California lawmakers used a sketchy parliamentary maneuver to knife Senate Bill 50 , an ambitious effort to undo restrictive local zoning rules and increase the supply of housing… “ Where progressives argue for openness and inclusion as a cudgel against President Trump , they abandon it on Nob Hill and in Beverly Hills… Not-in-my-backyardism is a bipartisan sentiment , but because the largest American cities are populated and run by Democrats — many in states under complete Democratic control — this sort of nakedly exclusionary urban restrictionism is a particular shame of the left. ” Farhad Manjoo , New York Times\n“ ‘ This is unregulated capitalism , unbridled capitalism , capitalism run amok . There are no guardrails , ’ says Salesforce founder and chairman Marc Benioff , a fourth-generation San Franciscan who in a TV interview branded his city ‘ a train wreck ’ … For decades , this coruscating city of hills , bordered by water on three sides , was a beloved haven for reinvention , a refuge for immigrants , bohemians , artists and outcasts . It was the great American romantic city , the Paris of the West . No longer . In a time of scarce consensus , everyone agrees that something has rotted in San Francisco . ” Karen Heller , Washington Post\nThe right blames liberal policies for harming the quality of life of California ’ s residents .\nThe right blames liberal policies for harming the quality of life of California ’ s residents .\n“ The top California income-tax rate is 13.3 percent ( the nation ’ s highest ) . The state ’ s average sales tax is ( conservatively ) about 8.5 percent ( ninth in the nation ) . California ’ s bewildering combined array of gasoline taxes are about 55 cents per gallon and rising ( second-highest in the nation ) . In exchange , California public-school test scores rank between 44th and 46th in the nation . Its roads and infrastructure are rated in various surveys between 42nd and 45th . Driving from the state ’ s interior to the coast on roads mostly unchanged from 45 years ago takes about twice the time as in the past — if carefully planned at particular times and days of the week . ”\n“ The quality of life in California is in free fall thanks to liberal policies exactly like those [ Democratic presidential ] candidates want to impose on the entire nation… California ’ s energy costs are already the second-highest in the nation ; the renewables mandate may scratch an environmental itch , but it will surely mean residents soon pay more for gasoline , or heating oil and electricity…\n“ These are policies that lead to high prices for housing and energy , a laissez-faire approach to law and order that leads to tent cities and rising crime , rising spending that demands exorbitant taxes and big government programs that mean diminished personal freedoms . ”\n“ San Francisco is the nation ’ s leader in property crime . Burglary , larceny , shoplifting , and vandalism are included under this ugly umbrella . The rate of car break-ins is particularly striking : in 2017 over 30,000 reports were filed , and the current average is 51 per day… the poor bear the brunt of low-level and property crimes . ‘ In the Tenderloin we have vulnerable populations—people of color , the most children , the second-highest concentration of elders , and they are held hostage by drug dealers and theft , and the city tells them these crimes are not that bad , ’ says [ former prosecutor Nancy ] Tung . ‘ We are failing to protect them . The police do a good job , because the criminals are caught , only to be released back on the streets over and over . ’ ”\nCalifornia “ has the worst ranking for homelessness , 8th worst for roads , and worst for teacher-to-student ratio . Its prisons are so crowded that the Supreme Court determined them to constitute cruel and unusual punishment , and it suffered the worst budget crisis of all the states during the Great Recession…\n“ Residents are so mesmerized by the amazing weather and beauty of the place that they tend to overlook the quality of the services . And as a result , management does not change . The state has been under the same Democratic Party management for years . Their monopoly on power is so safe that they now hold supermajorities in both houses of the Legislature despite California ’ s worsening condition . Management has no incentive to change when it keeps getting re-elected . ”\nIt ’ s worth noting that “ conservative ideas were much more popular when not associated with the Republican party . In Washington State , voters narrowly rejected bringing affirmative action back to state contracting and university admissions…  “ In Seattle , the self-proclaimed socialist city-council member appears to have lost her seat to a pro-business challenger . In Colorado , voters gave fiscal conservatives a big win by rejecting letting the state keep any tax revenues above the state spending cap , money that the state Taxpayer ’ s Bill of Rights currently guarantees as refunds to taxpayers . In Sussex County , N.J. , voters approved , by a 2-to-1 margin , a referendum directing the local freeholder board to cooperate with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement . ( Washington , Colorado , New Jersey — notice these are places where Republican candidates have had no luck lately . ) ”\n“ If a dozen drones or missiles can do the kind of damage to the world economy as did those fired on Saturday—shutting down about 6 percent of world oil production—imagine what a U.S.-Iran-Saudi war would do to the world economy . In recent decades , the U.S. has sold the Saudis hundreds of billions of dollars of military equipment . Did our weapons sales carry a guarantee that we will also come and fight alongside the kingdom if it gets into a war with its neighbors ? … the nation does not want another war . How we avoid it , however , is becoming difficult to see . John Bolton may be gone from the West Wing , but his soul is marching on . ”\nOthers note , “ I ’ d hate to be a Democratic member of Congress trying to convince Joe Sixpack that this is a whole new ballgame . The transcript shows Trump being Trump and Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky trying to ingratiate himself with the big dog by , for instance , mentioning that he stays at Trump hotels . Trump ’ s conversation is typically scattershot , wandering all over the field , leaving a reasonable listener puzzled about what the takeaways are supposed to be…  “ I think Joe Sixpack ’ s response is going to be a hearty shrug . After all that has emerged about Trump so far , his approval rating is closely tracking Obama ’ s approval at the same point in his presidency . To get Mr. Sixpack ’ s attention you are going to have to do better than this . ”


Charlie Click was homeless and living in his car in Austin , Texas , when a stranger in a white truck offered him a sandwich and a fresh pair of socks . When he was in his late 50s , Click had lost his home and most of his possessions after a yearslong spiral that included four prison terms and two cancer diagnoses . The ordeal had left Click alone and dependent on pills and alcohol to cope , but the stranger 's kindness started a chain of events that would reverse the course of his life .\nThe Good Samaritan had been dispatched by Mobile Loaves & Fishes , a faith-based charity that delivers food to needy Austin residents . The organization had also constructed a village nearby for homeless people . Urged on by the socks-and-food-delivering stranger , Click applied for residency and was accepted . He drove the vehicle where he had been sleeping to Community First ! Village , a neighborhood with neat rows of micro-homes and R.V.s situated on the outskirts of town , northeast of central Austin . Freshly paved roads and tree-covered walking paths passed by wooden porch swings , a community center , and gardens bursting with produce . There was a barbershop , an art studio , a chapel , and an outdoor movie theater . Click moved into a single-room cottage with canvas walls , essentially a glorified tent— '' the cheapest thing going , '' he says—and found work on-site . After years of wandering , he was home .\n`` I 'm in a place where I can not only be secure , but I can be secure until I die , '' Click recalls thinking . `` I ca n't describe when that feeling hit me—'wow , I do n't have to go anywhere . ' ''\nSet on a 51-acre parcel of land eight miles from the Texas State Capitol , Community First ! Village opened its doors in late 2015 and has become one of the nation 's most renowned private programs for alleviating homelessness . The property houses more than 180 formerly homeless people in a tightknit neighborhood . Each residence has a porch facing a public space that encourages interaction with neighbors , a crucial design feature for a vulnerable population recovering from years of isolation .\nMonthly rents range from $ 225 for a micro-home to $ 430 for a family-sized R.V . The streets have names like `` Peaceful Path , '' `` Goodness Way , '' and `` Grace & Mercy Trail . '' Residents support themselves financially by working in maintenance , cleaning , landscaping , gardening , animal husbandry , auto mechanics , woodworking , blacksmithing , and hospitality for visitors who rent some of the tiny homes through Airbnb . To keep rents down , the least expensive units come without bathrooms or kitchens , so residents use shared bathhouses and open-air cooking pavilions that are dispersed less than a minute 's walk from each doorstep . Founder Alan Graham calls it `` an R.V . park on steroids . ''\nGraham , a 63-year-old former real estate developer , co-founded Mobile Loaves & Fishes with friends from his church in 1998 . The ministry began as the truck delivery program and branched out into housing years later . The secret to the village 's success , he says , is providing more than a roof and a bed . It 's a matter of absorbing homeless people into a community where they can find support , mentors , friendships , and reliable paid work .\nA `` housing first '' philosophy of homeless care does n't go far enough to fix the problem , Graham says . `` Housing will never solve homelessness . But community will . ''\nTo encourage a sense of community , public spaces abound : The Alamo Drafthouse sponsored a 500-seat outdoor amphitheater where movies are projected from an Airstream trailer . Residents tend organic gardens and harvest eggs from chickens . Volunteer groups from Austin serve meals regularly at long , covered communal tables . Community members have access to a health clinic , counseling , drug and alcohol rehabilitation services , and hospice care . An on-site columbarium with ashes of deceased neighbors serves as a reminder that they are welcome to stay for life . Around 50 volunteers who have never been homeless , referred to as `` missional '' residents , live in the community full time and provide support to vulnerable residents struggling with the transition to permanent housing . They lead Bible studies , host cookouts , and pay regular visits to sick or isolated neighbors .\n`` We call our community a 250-bedroom , $ 18 million mansion , '' Graham says . `` We all live in the same house . Your bedroom happens to be your 200 square feet over there . ''\nGraham lives on site with his wife in a 399-square-foot tiny house . He wears the same uniform almost every day : a long-sleeved Columbia fisherman 's button-down with the Mobile Loaves & Fishes logo above one breast pocket and the word Goodness over the other . A silver crucifix hangs prominently over his chest . He wears glasses and a Papa Hemingway–style white beard across his face , which is almost always shielded—indoors and out—beneath a ball cap that also bears the group 's emblem .\nA native of southeast Texas , Graham speaks with a kindly drawl . He 's devoutly Catholic but cusses when it 's necessary and exudes a calming air of approachability . Despite a former life as a developer in one of America 's hottest real estate markets , he has slept outside on Austin 's streets more than 250 times to gain a better understanding of the homeless plight .\nIn the late 1990s , Graham and four parishioners from St. John Neumann Catholic Church bought a used pickup truck from which to pass out meals and supplies to homeless people . They faced a steep learning curve . All of the founders were white and wealthy ; they knew little about the lives of the people they were trying to serve . `` We were clueless , '' Graham wrote in Welcome Homeless , a memoir about his life .\nThe group needed someone who knew what it was like to live on the streets without family , food , and hope . They found their man in Houston Flake , a homeless and illiterate man who took Graham into an urban forest in South Austin—a wooded green space where many of the city 's homeless choose to live , a community of cardboard box shelters and tents . `` I was a traveler in a foreign land , '' Graham wrote in his book . Flake introduced Graham to a woman named Marge , a former junkie who had spent time in prison and now lived in the woods . After Flake wrapped her in a bear hug and kissed her , Graham felt reluctant to even shake her hand . `` Where had that hand been ? '' he recalled wondering .\nIf he really wanted to help homeless people , Graham realized , he would need to be willing to touch them .\nIt was n't long after the launch of the charity food truck that Austin 's homeless people began to recognize it on the streets . The ministry expanded into a full-time nonprofit , which today dispatches 12 pickup trucks that roam Austin 's streets 365 days a year . Since 1998 , the trucks have served more than 5.5 million meals . As he built relationships with the homeless people who visited the truck , Graham also began raising money to shelter them in R.V.s throughout the city .\nOver time , Graham developed an understanding of his homeless neighbors ' needs . Even well-intentioned public efforts to provide housing and shelter , he concluded , were systematically ill-equipped to deal with the deep personal challenges that lead to chronic homelessness .\n`` Government can not mitigate this problem , '' says Graham , who describes his political views as `` conservative , but probably more libertarian . '' Americans , he says , `` are abdicating this responsibility to city hall , the state government , Washington , D.C. That is unfair . They do n't have the money , they do n't have the ability , they do n't have the understanding of why this is happening . Government housing is a transaction . The government builds or supports the creation of housing , but there 's no community involved in the life of those developments . ''\nToday , Austin is a boomtown , with well-funded tech companies clamoring to plant their flags there . Drawn by Austin 's warm weather , a thriving music scene , and the state 's lack of personal income tax , well-paid college graduates and families have poured into the area . Festivals like Austin City Limits and South by Southwest draw thousands of visitors each year , marking the city as a cultural hub . For three years in a row , U.S. News & World Report has named Austin the best place in America to live .\nThe rapid growth and popularity , however , have drastically increased the cost of living . The Austin Board of Realtors reported that the city 's median home price reached $ 410,000 in July , compared to the national median price of $ 280,800 . Despite recent efforts to ease building restrictions , Austin 's zoning rules limit high-density housing and restrict building heights in some areas of the city , which reduces the number of units available and , naturally , drives up the cost of living .\nFrom 2018 to 2019 , Austin 's homeless population rose from 2,147 to 2,255—a 5 percent increase—according to an annual count conducted by the Ending Community Homelessness Coalition , an Austin-based nonprofit . Nationwide data collected by the Department of Housing and Urban Development show a 2 percent increase in homelessness over a similar time period .\nLawmakers in Austin have taken notice . In August , the city appointed a `` homelessness czar '' to oversee programs and initiatives to reduce the number of people sleeping on the streets . In June , after hours of debate at city hall , the City Council voted to overturn a law banning urban camping , making it legal for people to pitch tents in most public areas as long as they do n't block traffic or cause a hazard .\nLocals who oppose the new rule fear it could leave Austin looking like San Francisco , whose highly visible homeless population has surged by 30 percent in the last two years . `` We have to act decisively and deliberately and in a big way now , '' Austin Mayor Steve Adler said after a July trip to West Coast cities facing the worst of the homelessness crisis . `` Because if we do n't , this is a challenge that will spiral out of control . ''\nYears before , Graham saw this coming . While the mobile food truck served an important role in alleviating the symptoms of homelessness , it could go only so far to address its root causes . He had an idea : Instead of just providing food and shelter , what if he could build an entire neighborhood for people who were chronically homeless ? More than a house for one person or family ; a community for hundreds , together .\nAfter decades working in Austin real estate—negotiating deals , securing permits , navigating the city 's zoning rules , and gaining approval from the right bureaucrats—Graham knew the system well and had relationships with Austin power brokers . Building an R.V . park would be nothing compared to the projects he had already seen through hundreds of times . How hard could it be ?\nIn 2006 , Graham drew up a detailed plan for a community that he intended to build on undeveloped land owned by the city . The first stages of planning showed promise . He presented the idea to Austin 's then-mayor , Will Wynn , who was sympathetic and supportive—his own grandfather had been a homeless alcoholic . Graham had another powerful champion in Mike Martinez , a City Council member , who helped him find 17 acres in East Austin for the first phase of building . In spring 2008 , the Council voted unanimously to grant Graham 's nonprofit a long-term lease .\nGraham 's excitement at the project 's rapid momentum lasted only until the first neighborhood meeting that summer , where he presented the idea to the public . It was a disaster . More than 50 neighborhood residents came to stop the plan .\nThe Austin Chronicle reported that Graham and his allies were `` under siege . '' Before the meeting began , a man angrily confronted Graham , and when Martinez tried to step in , the man called him a `` filthy pig . '' Graham says he watched another person spit on Martinez .\n`` It just flat turned into Armageddon , '' Graham says . `` It was awful . The police were called . ''\nA long line of speakers rolled out the typical NIMBY ( `` not in my backyard '' ) tropes , warning that Graham 's project would bring in drug addicts , rapists , and murderers—or , worse , lower property values . People attacked Graham personally , unveiling tax documents with his family 's home address .\n`` The comments were vicious , '' Graham says . `` It 's NIMBYism at its highest level . It 's an infection and an indictment on our culture . ''\nAt the meeting , some asked why Graham was n't building the mobile-home park next to his house in Westlake , one of the city 's wealthiest enclaves . ( At the time , Graham and his wife were using their spare bedrooms to shelter homeless people until the R.V . park could be built . ) At least one person affiliated with Graham 's project acknowledged that this critique hit home .\n`` I do n't know if I would want a homeless community in my neighborhood , I really do n't , '' Bruce Agness , a member of the Community First board who also lives in Westlake , says . `` I get that , even though I co-founded this thing . ''\nAt the end of the meeting , the neighborhood voted unanimously , 52–0 , in opposition .\nThe intensity of the meeting spooked Martinez , whose seat on the City Council could have been jeopardized if he did n't change course . He called a press conference the following day and announced that the project would be postponed .\nGraham and his team were deflated by the response . The exhausting process convinced Graham that he could not work within the city government apparatus if he wanted to succeed . Austin had too many regulations , too many rules , too many restrictions , and too many NIMBYs . `` I think government ought to get out of our way and let the people do what we can do , '' Graham says . But in order for the government to get out of his way , Graham needed to get out of the government 's way . And he found a clause in Texas land law that would allow him to do just that .\nHaving exhausted his political capital and most options for viable land within Austin 's city limits , Graham determined that he could no longer wait on the city 's political process . Four years had passed since he had the idea for a mobile home park , and , having been run out of every neighborhood where he proposed a site , he had little to show for his work . He devised a plan to build in a place where city council members and zealous NIMBYs could n't stop him .\nUnlike most urban areas , unincorporated Texas land is n't bound by strict zoning rules . The region surrounding Austin is a frontier-like place when it comes to architectural experimentation , and if Graham could find a tract of land beyond city limits , he could do virtually whatever he wished .\n`` When that revelation hit me , it was 'Katie , bar the door , ' '' Graham says . `` We 're gon na get this done , and there 's nothing that NIMBYs can do to stop us . ''\nWith a private blessing from Lee Leffingwell , the new mayor , Graham found and raised money to buy an available tract less than 10 miles from downtown . Austin transitions from urban to rural quickly , allowing access to a vast homeless population that 's concentrated downtown . When Graham and his team visited , they found `` a crummy , crap-filled piece of land '' full of weeds and three tons of trash and debris . Over several weeks , volunteer crews hauled away more than a thousand used tires and filled 20 dumpster trucks with garbage . They even discovered two stolen cars among the weeds .\n`` It was just what we needed , '' Graham recalls . They broke ground and started building . The first residents moved into their tiny homes in 2015 . Graham 's dream had become reality .\nA day in the village is not unlike any small neighborhood . But here , residents live much of their lives in the open . On any given afternoon , the air fills with noise of conversations from porch to porch , the occasional clang from the blacksmith workshop , or the grind of a power tool in the community garage . When you 're outside , it 's almost impossible to be alone—and that 's the point . Unlike in modern suburbs , where so much of life is hidden behind closed doors and privacy fences , problems in this neighborhood never remain hidden for long , which allows the community to respond quickly .\n`` Most people in the United States today live in these hermetically sealed single-family sarcophaguses that we call the American dream , in these isolated subdivisions , '' Graham notes . `` You do n't know your neighbors . You do n't know if they 're battling addictions . You do n't know if they 're wanting to put a shotgun in their mouth and pull the trigger with their big toe . In our community , we know everything . ''\nLife in the village , Graham says , is `` absolutely peaceful , with a side salad of tension . ''\nNo one claims that Community First ! is a utopia . Disputes do break out . One of Graham 's own neighbors tried to sue him twice—once for $ 20 and the other time for $ 5—over small tenant issues that were later settled privately . ( Graham and the man today remain neighbors and friends . )\n`` Every now and then there 's a fight , '' Graham says . `` People yelling and screaming at each other sometimes . Some of that is fueled by mental health issues going back to traumatic childhood backgrounds . '' Community leaders work with offenders by practicing restorative justice , an approach to conflict resolution that involves reconciliation and repairing the harm caused , but they call the police when needed .\nSince the first residents moved in , crimes have occurred , but mostly of the petty variety : a stolen debit card here , a missing bicycle there . There have been no reports of rape , murder , or serious violence , Graham says . Guns are not allowed . When one resident held up a neighbor with a knife , he was caught , charged , and convicted . He did not return .\nIn cases of attempted crime on the property , it 's almost impossible to get away with anything here anyway : Security cameras record the property 's open areas , and life is so public that few misdeeds go unnoticed .\nApplicants are screened before being accepted for residency , with prerequisites that they have been homeless for at least a year in the Austin area and that they undergo a background check . A history of substance abuse does not disqualify someone , nor does a criminal record like Click 's . But people convicted of murder , kidnapping , or sex-related crimes are not admitted . Those who continue to struggle with addiction are provided with access to rehab options , counseling , support groups , and relationships with missional residents to help them along .\nFaith was a driving force in the founding and remains a sustaining one within the community , although participation in services is not required for residents . Most of the missional residents come from Christian backgrounds , and there 's a chapel on site for worship and contemplative prayer . Church groups visit and volunteer time or serve meals .\n`` We 're driven by God , '' says Agness , the board member . `` A lot of people gloss over that . ''\nFor some residents , the transition from a life on the streets to a warm bed is difficult . `` It takes some people three or four or five months to get used to having a place to go to where they can close the door and not worry about somebody coming in and taking their belongings , '' Agness says . `` For some people , it takes two or three months before they 'll sleep on the bed . They sleep on the floor . ''\nResidents who have lived for years in isolation also can take time growing accustomed to being in close proximity to others . Click , for instance , holed himself up for months before beginning to engage with his neighbors . Others are known to go out of their way to avoid seeing other residents en route to meals or the bathhouses .\n`` Some guys are such introverts that they get off the bus , walk along the property line , jump the fence , and go into their tiny house . They do n't want to see anybody , '' says Nancy Miller , a missional resident who has lived in the village since 2015 . `` And that 's cool . They do n't have to be like us and want to hang out with everybody . ''\nWith homelessness rates increasing , the village is growing . Construction crews broke ground in October 2018 to expand the enterprise , bringing the population to about 500 people , with 20 percent of the units for missional residents . Once everyone is moved in , which the organization expects will occur around three years from now , the ministry will house one-fourth of Austin 's chronically homeless population , defined as those without a home for more than a year .\nAbout 15,000 people volunteer at Community First ! every year . The organization hosts a quarterly symposium to share strategies for replicating the village 's success that draws representatives from local governments and nonprofits across the nation . Mobile Loaves & Fishes has helped spawn food truck ministries in other cities around the country , including New Orleans , Nashville , and San Antonio .\nIn 2019 , Click 's life took another turn for the better . He met a woman , Tracy , who also lives in the Community First ! Village . They had a May wedding in the neighborhood 's Unity Hall , and he traded his bachelor 's canvas home for a family-sized place up the hill , on Grace & Mercy Trail .