Homeless people are more prevalent in Democratic states because those states tend to provide more services for the homeless. However, there are a lot more homelessness in California than Boston, Massachusetts, both deep blue states. The main reason more homeless people are in California is the climate. A person has to be really, really lazy and messed up to want to spend the winter sleeping on the streets in Boston or New York City, when they could be basking in the sun in California. It used to be a joke that people were moving to California because if everything went to hell, you could always sleep on the beach. It's not a joke anymore, because now you can be kicked off the beach, but can sleep or camp anywhere on the sidewalk. It's a strange characteristic of issues like homelessness, that the more you try to be nice and help the homeless, the more homeless you will have. 

It has become a practical approach to get what you want.

Certain city residents have learned that it’s a logical approach to the good things in life, if you have no earning power: no valuable skills, no education, no experience, a criminal record, or are just plain lazy; But most importantly, people have learned that there is virtually no chance of being punished or sent to jail if caught. Property crimes, and even violent crimes, are rarely prosecuted in the cities, yet there remains plenty to gain (like a stolen car, drugs, or money). No one believes anymore that they’ll literally go to hell for stealing, and even society in certain sectors, both rich and poor, don't condemn stealing, although the rich do tend to condemn when it's their stuff being stolen. From the "used to be called criminals" viewpoint, there is nothing to lose and plenty to gain. 

Razor thin rings of Saturn
The rings of Saturn are razor thin (about 100 meters) compared to Saturn's size 
Occam's and his Razor

What is most amazing about William of Ockham, an English philosopher and scientist, among other things, is that despite being born in the depths of the “Dark Ages”, in 1287, his principle for evaluating entities or situations is still well known, often referenced, and still works. This principle is that if there are competing theories about ‘something’, the simplest explanation is generally the best (correct) explanation.  An example is Galileo using this principle to explain the rotation of the planets and stars, showing that it is a whole lot less complex to explain the movement of the stars and planets if everything, including the earth, rotate around the sun, than if everything in the universe, including the sun, rotates around the earth. This was a very heretical idea in those days, when the ‘establishment’ was the Catholic Church, because somewhere in the oldest parts of the bible it states or implies that the earth is the center of the universe. Galileo subsequently was declared a heretic, and then did what any sane person would do. He recanted his belief that the earth revolved around the sun, given that his other option was torture on ‘the rack’ until he changed his mind.

Think  about what the answers would be if Occam’s Razor was applied today, to a whole range of social issues? I’m not even going to mention them, since I have no wish to be canceled or shunned, which is the modern version of the rack. Some things never change.


Because the people called journalists aren't really journalists

Before the Internet and social media became large parts of our lives, journalism was a prestigious, well paying career. Time Inc used to be called “Paradise Publishing”, the benefits were so good. Journalism ethics were taught in schools. But, the Internet killed journalism as a career. No normal person, wanting to raise a family, work hard, and live the American dream, would now consider becoming a journalist. The pay is poor, job security is nonexistent, and the benefits and prestige are gone. The only people who now want to be journalists are political activists and true believers, which is why the news is so slanted now. Journalists aren’t more biased than they used to be, but rather, with a few exceptions there just aren’t any journalists anymore.