4 ms·

If an 80 year old pensioner has lived in their San Francisco apartment for 50 years, but can no longer afford their rent because it has skyrocketed, what do you

If an 80 year old pensioner has lived in their San Francisco apartment for 50 years, but can no longer afford their rent because it has skyrocketed, what do you think should happen?

mc32 11y ago
Personally? I think the state should underwrite those folks in housing set aside for retirees. Since they are retired, there is no need for them to be close to jobs --they do need to be close to medical and shopping facilities, etc, or provide those services via alternative means (door delivery, personal visits, etc.)
- joeevans1000 11y ago
  Well, for me, cities are more than just a proximal place to jobs. They have a culture, part of which is retirees. Additionally, I think shipping off retirees (or just the poor ones, it seems) would be harsh for them.
  - mc32 11y ago
    I understand your take. And I understand people can have some attachment, but I think those emotions are temporary and can be addressed by making these alternative places attractive places --places built with retirees in mind. Lots of retirees from cold states move hundreds of miles to warmer climates --there may be some thought to attachment, but mostly they look forward to places made to accommodate them. Places where there are others just like them. An alternative which happens in places with declining populations, is retirees dying in their homes, alone, to be discovered days or months after. The poor are another separate issue. They need to be close to jobs or at least have a way to get to jobs easily. When I was poor, I didn't care to live in a cachet neighborhood, I just needed to be able to get to my job with reasonable public transit and I wanted to feel the area was safe. Of course, given the alternative, I'd want to rent a bungalow next to the beach for cheap, but it's not a necessity and it's not a necessity to live next to one's job. That said, I would love to see more mixed use zoning.
    - kelnos 11y ago
      Places where there are others just like them. Gross. I get that some people get to places in their lives where they don't want to deal with diversity, but I don't want cities to turn into places like that. Retirees (those who do want to stay, and don't want to live in a retirement community) are a part of that diversity. Shipping anyone off involuntarily (or even semi-involuntarily, in the case of ridiculous housing cost swings) is completely unacceptable to me.
      - mc32 11y ago
        When you are old your values change and you're just looking for convenience and people in the same boat. That does not mean they want to not have ethnic diversity they just don't want to deal with non 'generians so much. They still want some younger people, but want the understanding of older people around them --no, they also don't want to be depressed by those near the end, but I'm not talking that stage home. And I don't think homogeneity is gross. Do you think Nigerians feel gross, or do you think the Japanese feel gross? It's neither better nor worse then heterogeneity.
thephyber 11y ago
That is the same situation which was sold to the voters of California in 1979 for Prop 13 and now we have underfunded schools, fire departments, and police departments. Property values are now artificially inflated because long-time owners are underpaying property taxes (they are growth-capped) and recent purchasers are paying much more for identical properties. Additionally, Prop 13 is an effective real estate transaction friction which keeps inefficiency in the housing market. I would hope the city would offer to partner with a shrinking small town to help relocate people who can no longer afford to live in the city to a town that is suffering from a high rental vacancy rate. A pensioner will only continue to be squeezed by living in a high-demand city as even rent-controlled units are allowed to raise their rents.
- iofj 11y ago
  > That is the same situation which was sold to the voters of California in 1979 for Prop 13 and now we have underfunded schools, fire departments, and police departments And these 2 are related ... how ? California is broke, which is what causes those underfunding issues. Why ? Nobody is blaming rent control. It's there, but it's so small it registers on very few radars. Rightist view: http://www.businessinsider.com.au/reasons-to-leave-california-2010-10 http://www.businessinsider.com.au/reasons-to-leave-californi... (TLDR: unemployment (due to various high taxes, rightist site indeed), debt (pension/unemployment liabilities), poverty) Leftist view: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-samuels/why-california-is-broke-a_b_846143.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-samuels/why-california-is-... (TLDR: tax exemptions for large corporations, including the claim they wouldn't leave for high tax because of good schools)
  - thephyber 11y ago
    My previous post's parent discussed an 80 year old pensioner being unable to afford to continue living in San Francisco (or some other hypothetical rent controlled city) despite the fact that they can't afford to live there without rent control. That was the exact scenario that was sold to California voters in 1978 for Prop 13 and people voted for it because it seemed like it would benefit them (at least in the short term) and actually does the opposite long-term. Re: the financial situation, California only recently paid off debts left over from the wake of Enron criminal fraud days.[1] Obviously the underfunded retirement funds are huge looming unknowns, but they are partially (if not mostly) caused by local governments (such as the city of Stockton) underfunding during the bull market years and being unable to pay during the bear market years. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_electricity_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_electricity_crisis

If an 80 year old pensioner has lived in their San Francisco apartment for 50 years, but can no longer afford their rent because it has skyrocketed, what do you think should happen?

mc32 11y ago

Personally? I think the state should underwrite those folks in housing set aside for retirees. Since they are retired, there is no need for them to be close to jobs --they do need to be close to medical and shopping facilities, etc, or provide those services via alternative means (door delivery, personal visits, etc.)

joeevans1000 11y ago
Well, for me, cities are more than just a proximal place to jobs. They have a culture, part of which is retirees. Additionally, I think shipping off retirees (or just the poor ones, it seems) would be harsh for them.
- mc32 11y ago
  I understand your take. And I understand people can have some attachment, but I think those emotions are temporary and can be addressed by making these alternative places attractive places --places built with retirees in mind. Lots of retirees from cold states move hundreds of miles to warmer climates --there may be some thought to attachment, but mostly they look forward to places made to accommodate them. Places where there are others just like them. An alternative which happens in places with declining populations, is retirees dying in their homes, alone, to be discovered days or months after. The poor are another separate issue. They need to be close to jobs or at least have a way to get to jobs easily. When I was poor, I didn't care to live in a cachet neighborhood, I just needed to be able to get to my job with reasonable public transit and I wanted to feel the area was safe. Of course, given the alternative, I'd want to rent a bungalow next to the beach for cheap, but it's not a necessity and it's not a necessity to live next to one's job. That said, I would love to see more mixed use zoning.
  - kelnos 11y ago
    Places where there are others just like them. Gross. I get that some people get to places in their lives where they don't want to deal with diversity, but I don't want cities to turn into places like that. Retirees (those who do want to stay, and don't want to live in a retirement community) are a part of that diversity. Shipping anyone off involuntarily (or even semi-involuntarily, in the case of ridiculous housing cost swings) is completely unacceptable to me.
    - mc32 11y ago
      When you are old your values change and you're just looking for convenience and people in the same boat. That does not mean they want to not have ethnic diversity they just don't want to deal with non 'generians so much. They still want some younger people, but want the understanding of older people around them --no, they also don't want to be depressed by those near the end, but I'm not talking that stage home. And I don't think homogeneity is gross. Do you think Nigerians feel gross, or do you think the Japanese feel gross? It's neither better nor worse then heterogeneity.

thephyber 11y ago

That is the same situation which was sold to the voters of California in 1979 for Prop 13 and now we have underfunded schools, fire departments, and police departments. Property values are now artificially inflated because long-time owners are underpaying property taxes (they are growth-capped) and recent purchasers are paying much more for identical properties. Additionally, Prop 13 is an effective real estate transaction friction which keeps inefficiency in the housing market. I would hope the city would offer to partner with a shrinking small town to help relocate people who can no longer afford to live in the city to a town that is suffering from a high rental vacancy rate. A pensioner will only continue to be squeezed by living in a high-demand city as even rent-controlled units are allowed to raise their rents.

iofj 11y ago
> That is the same situation which was sold to the voters of California in 1979 for Prop 13 and now we have underfunded schools, fire departments, and police departments And these 2 are related ... how ? California is broke, which is what causes those underfunding issues. Why ? Nobody is blaming rent control. It's there, but it's so small it registers on very few radars. Rightist view: http://www.businessinsider.com.au/reasons-to-leave-california-2010-10 http://www.businessinsider.com.au/reasons-to-leave-californi... (TLDR: unemployment (due to various high taxes, rightist site indeed), debt (pension/unemployment liabilities), poverty) Leftist view: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-samuels/why-california-is-broke-a_b_846143.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-samuels/why-california-is-... (TLDR: tax exemptions for large corporations, including the claim they wouldn't leave for high tax because of good schools)
- thephyber 11y ago
  My previous post's parent discussed an 80 year old pensioner being unable to afford to continue living in San Francisco (or some other hypothetical rent controlled city) despite the fact that they can't afford to live there without rent control. That was the exact scenario that was sold to California voters in 1978 for Prop 13 and people voted for it because it seemed like it would benefit them (at least in the short term) and actually does the opposite long-term. Re: the financial situation, California only recently paid off debts left over from the wake of Enron criminal fraud days.[1] Obviously the underfunded retirement funds are huge looming unknowns, but they are partially (if not mostly) caused by local governments (such as the city of Stockton) underfunding during the bull market years and being unable to pay during the bear market years. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_electricity_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_electricity_crisis