[grahamburger]

I can definitely see how someone who sacrificed to pay rent throughout the pandemic, maybe using up some of their retirement funds or defaulting on car loans in the process, would be frustrated to learn now that they could have just not paid rent instead and been fine. They're not getting that money back. It doesn't necessarily mean that they want to see people become homeless.

(I don't have a dog in this fight, I don't live in California, don't rent, don't own rental property.)

[jude-]

> They're not getting that money back. It doesn't necessarily mean that they want to see people become homeless.

That sounds like a pretty privileged take on their parts. If they were wealthy enough to survive a global pandemic that upended the global economy without anyone's help, that speaks pretty well for them. But not everyone was so fortunate, and that's what this program addresses.

I see no cause for resentment here, anymore than I see cause for resentment against poor people on Medicaid while the more-fortunate pay for health insurance. Like, sure -- we could do something "radical" (by US standards) and make Medicaid available to everyone, but if the choice is between having health insurance only for those who can afford it (and sucks to be you if you can't), and having a Medicaid tax to pay for health coverage for those who can't afford insurance, I'd much rather take the latter.