At least here in Los Angeles, there's state-level regulation and budgetary constraints that limit what the mayor can do. And the city council is in the pocket of landlords.

In the middle ages we could blame a single king. Now it's a lot more complicated, between politicians and the people who bribe them.

Because news agencies and social engineering campaigns have created the common opinion that homeless people aren't people, or if they are, they're homeless because of their own poor choices. Plus, lots of people spend most of their time trying not to be homeless themselves, and then of course there's a large part of the population that just doesn't give a fuck, as long as it's not them.

For all those dogs know, the President is just a figurehead to placate the people into believing they have a measure of power while the corporations craft legislation which is forced through Congress by the power of their ~~bribes~~ political contributions.

I mean most funding for homelessness comes from local and state agencies, not federal.

So it's more like go after big dog state senators and neighbors who vote against shit like education taxes because no state, federal, or nonprofits have figures out a way to enact nonlocal taxes so public education is more well rounded rather than being shitty in poor places which is self reinforced.

Especially the people who own for their money by charging a levy to other people for using their things, exactly like a tax, without a hint of irony.

I don't have the issue. But I do block a few instances that where shitty individuals tend to congregate.

My Walmart was more security around the formula than Fort Knox.

Oh, well. At least it wasn't the second time the British Empire deliberately starved twenty million Indians.

Ah yes, the old "Communism is when no food" non-argument.