3 ms·

"The people of the city" It depends on what proportion of the city owns their home. If most people are renters, of course they want the price of housing to go

by rtpg 10y ago

"The people of the city" It depends on what proportion of the city owns their home. If most people are renters, of course they want the price of housing to go down! If there's one good rallying cry against capitalism as an effective means of societal advance, it's rent seeking and the conflicts it causes. I bring it up every time this topic comes up, but NYC is not the only way to make a "big city". Tokyo is nice, high density, but there are trees all over the place. All for 1/5th the rent of SF. A well designed big city is not one that just has taller buildings. It has better service distribution, so there are, overall, less cars. There aren't just a grid of avenues (that's too convenient for cars!), but many roads that are smaller. Building development is not allowed to block out sunlight from other buildings. Street noise is handled by making only a couple large avenues, with most streets being extremely small and low-traffic. Yes, it makes traffic worse for some people. Don't have as many people driving all over.

mcguire 10y ago
http://www.economist.com/node/13415153 http://www.economist.com/node/13415153 [2009] http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2012/08/lost-decades http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2012/08/lost-dec... [2012] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Decade_%28Japan%29?wprov=sfla1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Decade_%28Japan%29?wpro...
- mcguire 10y ago
  So, the fact that Japan spent two decades in an economic flatline after the collapse of an asset (specifically, property) bubble has no influence on the current price of property?
sologoub 10y ago
I have not been to Tokyo, but I still don't see how you make a plot of land as small as SF support 4-5 million people without still creating serious compromises to quality of life for the lower end of the price range. You still need to displace people for new development. Renters, just like owners do not want to move to make room for "new comers". Even if the move is close in proximity. EDIT: Another example - Santa Monica, CA. Renters hold the legislative power (64.1% renter population), but the opposite of what you describe happens - the renter-elected city council members oppose growth and renter-led coalitions block development of great projects. Sources: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Monica,_California https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Monica,_California http://la.curbed.com/2015/8/21/9928090/pretty-expoadjacent-office-space-rising-on-the-grave-of-the-bergamot http://la.curbed.com/2015/8/21/9928090/pretty-expoadjacent-o...
- twblalock 10y ago
  > I have not been to Tokyo, but I still don't see how you make a plot of land as small as SF support 4-5 million people without still creating serious compromises to quality of life for the lower end of the price range. Well, you should go there and see for yourself how much better it is. I have done that, and I can tell you without any hesitation that I would rather be poor in Tokyo than in San Francisco or any other major city in the US. You can get across Tokyo on a train for the equivalent of a few dollars, there is universal health care, rent and home prices are lower, and Tokyo is more cosmopolitan. Unless you are looking for software engineering jobs, Tokyo is a better place to live. And on top of all of that, the population of the Tokyo metropolitan area is almost as large as the entire population of California.
  - sologoub 10y ago
    Some day... but for other reasons, I'm sure I won't have any desire to live there.
Decade 10y ago
San Francisco has a unique problem. Even though most people are renters, they still oppose policies that would lead to price decreases. That is why I support YIMBY Action and not the old Tenants Union. https://yimbyaction.org/about/ https://yimbyaction.org/about/ What happened is that the revolutionary anti-capitalists of the 1960s and 1970s passed into law such a thicket of tenant protections, that being a tenant gives you most of the benefits of ownership. If the building was built before 1979, the tenant even gets rent control, that prevents their rent from rising with the cost of maintenance. This is regardless of the tenant’s ability to pay increased rent. The way the law was written, new construction is exempt from rent control. The old tenants union therefore opposes all new construction, especially new construction that destroys rent-controlled units. No new construction, in the presence of increased demand, raises prices.

by rtpg 10y ago

mcguire 10y ago

http://www.economist.com/node/13415153 http://www.economist.com/node/13415153 [2009] http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2012/08/lost-decades http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2012/08/lost-dec... [2012] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Decade_%28Japan%29?wprov=sfla1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Decade_%28Japan%29?wpro...

mcguire 10y ago
So, the fact that Japan spent two decades in an economic flatline after the collapse of an asset (specifically, property) bubble has no influence on the current price of property?

sologoub 10y ago

I have not been to Tokyo, but I still don't see how you make a plot of land as small as SF support 4-5 million people without still creating serious compromises to quality of life for the lower end of the price range. You still need to displace people for new development. Renters, just like owners do not want to move to make room for "new comers". Even if the move is close in proximity. EDIT: Another example - Santa Monica, CA. Renters hold the legislative power (64.1% renter population), but the opposite of what you describe happens - the renter-elected city council members oppose growth and renter-led coalitions block development of great projects. Sources: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Monica,_California https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Monica,_California http://la.curbed.com/2015/8/21/9928090/pretty-expoadjacent-office-space-rising-on-the-grave-of-the-bergamot http://la.curbed.com/2015/8/21/9928090/pretty-expoadjacent-o...

twblalock 10y ago
> I have not been to Tokyo, but I still don't see how you make a plot of land as small as SF support 4-5 million people without still creating serious compromises to quality of life for the lower end of the price range. Well, you should go there and see for yourself how much better it is. I have done that, and I can tell you without any hesitation that I would rather be poor in Tokyo than in San Francisco or any other major city in the US. You can get across Tokyo on a train for the equivalent of a few dollars, there is universal health care, rent and home prices are lower, and Tokyo is more cosmopolitan. Unless you are looking for software engineering jobs, Tokyo is a better place to live. And on top of all of that, the population of the Tokyo metropolitan area is almost as large as the entire population of California.
- sologoub 10y ago
  Some day... but for other reasons, I'm sure I won't have any desire to live there.

Decade 10y ago

San Francisco has a unique problem. Even though most people are renters, they still oppose policies that would lead to price decreases. That is why I support YIMBY Action and not the old Tenants Union. https://yimbyaction.org/about/ https://yimbyaction.org/about/ What happened is that the revolutionary anti-capitalists of the 1960s and 1970s passed into law such a thicket of tenant protections, that being a tenant gives you most of the benefits of ownership. If the building was built before 1979, the tenant even gets rent control, that prevents their rent from rising with the cost of maintenance. This is regardless of the tenant’s ability to pay increased rent. The way the law was written, new construction is exempt from rent control. The old tenants union therefore opposes all new construction, especially new construction that destroys rent-controlled units. No new construction, in the presence of increased demand, raises prices.