14 ms·

Some of the proposed measures may be misguided; others seem rather tame. But either way, talk of "strangling the golden goose" (or implications that the entire

Some of the proposed measures may be misguided; others seem rather tame. But either way, talk of "strangling the golden goose" (or implications that the entire industry will pack up and leave as a result of these measures) is just dumb hyperbole. On top of that, some of the author's logic is just... broken: It continues with the shutting down of private bus services for tech workers that reduce traffic and pollution and encourage residents to stay in the city. Almost none of the new tech workers were "residents" before the current boom. The problem with the shuttle busses is that they encourage people to move to the city -- forcing the people who were, in fact, long-term residents to move out. The fact that the author (obviously very sympathetic to the tech industry) can not just miss, but completely invert this obvious point simply underscores the disconnect -- or more direct terms, cluelessness -- among tech workers that some longer-term residents are so resentful of.

jimmywanger 10y ago
> forcing the people who were, in fact, long-term residents to move out. What's wrong with this? If you're a renter, you sort of accept the fact that you can be forced to move at any given time, or that rents may be hiked up. Rent control has been an unmitigated disaster in SF. You're basically giving a subsidy to people who have lived here for a long time, over new arrivals. Cities change over time. People arrive all the time. To try to shut people out is naive and short-sighted. I sure don't want to live in a time capsule.
- kafkaesq 10y ago
  What's wrong with this? Heck, I don't know -- whole families being traumatized? Children having their lives upended, because their parents suddenly have to move across the state (or the country)? That sort of thing? So you can live within walking distance of that fancy new Belgian beer bar, and your favorite S&M club? It's one thing to acknowledge that displacement of existing (generally lowest income tier) residents is very unfortunate -- and yes, causes real suffering -- but to maintain that the cure (e.g. rent control) may be worse than disease. That's at least a position with a certain logic to it. But what people reasonably resent about the new tech elite is that (some of them) don't even pretend to rely on sober assessments like the above. They just come right and out say it: "What's wrong with poor people being displaced? What's wrong with a city that school teachers, first responders, restaurant workers can't afford to live in? I'm doing fine -- why should I give a fuck?"
  - sardonicbryan 10y ago
    While I am sympathetic to cost of living issues, I think describing moving as "traumatizing" is being quite overdramatic. As a kid, I moved from the Bay Area to another country at age 8 because of my Dad's job, changed schools again for 7th and 8th grade then moved again to a 3rd city for high school. While there was definitely an adjustment period at each new place, I think learning to deal with new environments is a pretty useful life skill to have, and as an adult I would active seek to have my future kids live in a few different places. Yeah yeah, it's always a lot nicer to do that because I have a choice, I get that. I just think that level of hyperbole doesn't help the discussion at all.
    - kafkaesq 10y ago
      But were your parents evicted? Aside from actual physical violence or harassment, it's hard to think of an experience less traumatic and disruptive for a family.
      - jimmywanger 10y ago
        > Aside from actual physical violence or harassment, it's hard to think of an experience less traumatic and disruptive for a family. Think harder. How about not being about to get food and watching family starve in front of you? (see Venezuela and DPRK). How about watching your grandmother die of inoperable cancer over several months, to the point to where you have to wear earplugs to sleep over her moans of pain? (happened to me) There is nothing inherently traumatic about being evicted. There is something traumatic and disruptive about losing a job, a loved one, or even a pet. What part of the first world do you live in that you categorize all this as a "disruptive and traumatic" event?
        wglb 10y ago
        This comment and many of your others are over the line with respect to the guidelines. The "think harder" part in particular.
- idlewords 10y ago
  Renting does not mean accepting that you might have to move at any time. In large parts of Europe, and in American big cities, there are people who rent for decades or even generations. Renting an apartment should not put you at permanent risk of suddenly losing your home. The goal of rent control laws and rent caps is to avoid situations where families can be summarily uprooted. How well they succeed is another matter.
  - jimmywanger 10y ago
    In many parts of America, it does mean accepting you have to move at any time. If you don't have a lease and are going month-to-month, that's what you're signed up for. Sign a longer lease if you want, but everything is spelled out up front for you. No surprises. If they want to jack up rent or move back in unit, you have no legal recourse.

jimmywanger 10y ago

> forcing the people who were, in fact, long-term residents to move out. What's wrong with this? If you're a renter, you sort of accept the fact that you can be forced to move at any given time, or that rents may be hiked up. Rent control has been an unmitigated disaster in SF. You're basically giving a subsidy to people who have lived here for a long time, over new arrivals. Cities change over time. People arrive all the time. To try to shut people out is naive and short-sighted. I sure don't want to live in a time capsule.

kafkaesq 10y ago
What's wrong with this? Heck, I don't know -- whole families being traumatized? Children having their lives upended, because their parents suddenly have to move across the state (or the country)? That sort of thing? So you can live within walking distance of that fancy new Belgian beer bar, and your favorite S&M club? It's one thing to acknowledge that displacement of existing (generally lowest income tier) residents is very unfortunate -- and yes, causes real suffering -- but to maintain that the cure (e.g. rent control) may be worse than disease. That's at least a position with a certain logic to it. But what people reasonably resent about the new tech elite is that (some of them) don't even pretend to rely on sober assessments like the above. They just come right and out say it: "What's wrong with poor people being displaced? What's wrong with a city that school teachers, first responders, restaurant workers can't afford to live in? I'm doing fine -- why should I give a fuck?"
- sardonicbryan 10y ago
  While I am sympathetic to cost of living issues, I think describing moving as "traumatizing" is being quite overdramatic. As a kid, I moved from the Bay Area to another country at age 8 because of my Dad's job, changed schools again for 7th and 8th grade then moved again to a 3rd city for high school. While there was definitely an adjustment period at each new place, I think learning to deal with new environments is a pretty useful life skill to have, and as an adult I would active seek to have my future kids live in a few different places. Yeah yeah, it's always a lot nicer to do that because I have a choice, I get that. I just think that level of hyperbole doesn't help the discussion at all.
  - kafkaesq 10y ago
    But were your parents evicted? Aside from actual physical violence or harassment, it's hard to think of an experience less traumatic and disruptive for a family.
    - jimmywanger 10y ago
      > Aside from actual physical violence or harassment, it's hard to think of an experience less traumatic and disruptive for a family. Think harder. How about not being about to get food and watching family starve in front of you? (see Venezuela and DPRK). How about watching your grandmother die of inoperable cancer over several months, to the point to where you have to wear earplugs to sleep over her moans of pain? (happened to me) There is nothing inherently traumatic about being evicted. There is something traumatic and disruptive about losing a job, a loved one, or even a pet. What part of the first world do you live in that you categorize all this as a "disruptive and traumatic" event?
      - wglb 10y ago
        This comment and many of your others are over the line with respect to the guidelines. The "think harder" part in particular.
idlewords 10y ago
Renting does not mean accepting that you might have to move at any time. In large parts of Europe, and in American big cities, there are people who rent for decades or even generations. Renting an apartment should not put you at permanent risk of suddenly losing your home. The goal of rent control laws and rent caps is to avoid situations where families can be summarily uprooted. How well they succeed is another matter.
- jimmywanger 10y ago
  In many parts of America, it does mean accepting you have to move at any time. If you don't have a lease and are going month-to-month, that's what you're signed up for. Sign a longer lease if you want, but everything is spelled out up front for you. No surprises. If they want to jack up rent or move back in unit, you have no legal recourse.