3 ms·

Think of it reverse. Is it a universal right to have luxurious places to live in a high demand area? Why would people who want to move into or remain in SF on a

Think of it reverse. Is it a universal right to have luxurious places to live in a high demand area? Why would people who want to move into or remain in SF on a budget not want to change that? This is why issues like this are complicated. Both sides have some merit. (also, not taking sides since I don't live there any more)

kofejnik 10y ago
Not very complicated, there are universal human rights, plus whatever is guaranteed in a relevant constitution. Everything else is for those who can afford it. Luxurious place in high demand area is one example. (should we strive to make Ferraris affordable?) Otherwise, can people come live in your apartment? Why do you keep your place and your food and your car to yourself? Certainly a lot of people would want to change that.
- heartsucker 10y ago
  Ok, sure. It's not a universal human right, but we can do better than the absolute minimum to give some semblance of equality to people instead of leaving people's lives to the fate of where they were born in the world and how rich their parents were. If there was universal health care out in the world that said vaccinations and emergency procedures were free for everyone, but if you were born on Feb 1st, you also got a personal trainer and free cosmetic surgery, everyone else would be within reason to complain about such a system. This is effectively what is happening here.
  - kofejnik 10y ago
    as someone born in USSR, I assure you that artificial equality sucks much harder than natural inequality
dangrover 10y ago
Because cities are places of opportunity and culture where people can come to better their lot. Everyone should have some level of access to them, though not necessarily a luxury flat. There needs to be some basic bottom rung available. And cities need fresh blood to continue to grow and thrive, or else it just becomes a retirement community/tourist destination.

kofejnik 10y ago

Not very complicated, there are universal human rights, plus whatever is guaranteed in a relevant constitution. Everything else is for those who can afford it. Luxurious place in high demand area is one example. (should we strive to make Ferraris affordable?) Otherwise, can people come live in your apartment? Why do you keep your place and your food and your car to yourself? Certainly a lot of people would want to change that.

heartsucker 10y ago
Ok, sure. It's not a universal human right, but we can do better than the absolute minimum to give some semblance of equality to people instead of leaving people's lives to the fate of where they were born in the world and how rich their parents were. If there was universal health care out in the world that said vaccinations and emergency procedures were free for everyone, but if you were born on Feb 1st, you also got a personal trainer and free cosmetic surgery, everyone else would be within reason to complain about such a system. This is effectively what is happening here.
- kofejnik 10y ago
  as someone born in USSR, I assure you that artificial equality sucks much harder than natural inequality

dangrover 10y ago

Because cities are places of opportunity and culture where people can come to better their lot. Everyone should have some level of access to them, though not necessarily a luxury flat. There needs to be some basic bottom rung available. And cities need fresh blood to continue to grow and thrive, or else it just becomes a retirement community/tourist destination.