3 ms·

I am much less interested in what "should" happen in a macroeconomic sense than what is happening: lots of people need to live here right now. It's worth rememb

I am much less interested in what "should" happen in a macroeconomic sense than what is happening: lots of people need to live here right now. It's worth remembering that the people most hurt by NIMBY policies are not, by and large, the tech workers making six-figure salaries. The victims are the teachers, firefighters, artists, nurses, secretaries, and everyone else who isn't a programmer. Yeah, it might be nice if the US tech industry were more geographically distributed throughout the country (though that would also potentially have negative consequences due to constant relocation necessary when switching jobs). But NIMBY policies have broadly failed at getting people to move away. They have, in fact, just made the situation worse.

timr 9y ago
"The victims are the teachers, firefighters, artists, nurses, secretaries, and everyone else who isn't a programmer." OK...but that's also an argument for creating public policy that discourages tech companies from locating in the city. We could start by eliminating the mid-Market tax incentives. The "yimby" movement is at least as much about tech companies who have invaded and now want to change their environment, as it is "everyone else who isn't a programmer." I wish we could be honest about that fact.
- Decade 9y ago
  The housing crisis is much MUCH older than the tech boom. From your privileged position, with lots of income relative to normal Americans, there wasn’t a crisis until you couldn’t afford San Francisco. My parents are poor, so I watched the market from the bottom end. What I experienced was that the amount we paid for what we got was sort of dumb, but at least we could afford an illegal in-law. Then, in the early 1990s, we got an OMI eviction and moved in with relatives. And now I’m paying twice as much for a fourth of the space in the same neighborhood, while my parents were ripped from their communities and moved out of the Bay Area. For the low end of the market, any restriction will make housing more scarce, and San Francisco is not short on restrictions. That is why I support the YIMBY movement. https://sf.curbed.com/2013/4/3/10257506/navigating-the-treacherous-and-tumultuous-san-francisco-permitting https://sf.curbed.com/2013/4/3/10257506/navigating-the-treac... Even without the tech boom, California hasn’t been keeping up with housing demand: “Every generation, civilization is invaded by barbarians - we call them ‘children.’” - Hannah Arendt http://ochousingnews.com/california-nimbys-dont-love-children/ http://ochousingnews.com/california-nimbys-dont-love-childre...
  - timr 9y ago
    "The housing crisis is much MUCH older than the tech boom." Except, it isn't. As I've documented in this thread, like most American cities, the SF population was declining for ~30 years, until the mid/late 1980s. The first tech boom really kicked things off for local real estate again, starting in the early 90s...which was the last time the city saw a building boom. Developers build in times of increasing demand, and that's exactly what happens in SF. In any case, repeating the "supply and demand" mantra doesn't change basic facts about the timing and cause of this boom. The problem is not that developers "didn't build enough" in 1980...it's that we've disproportionately grown demand starting in ~2012, and large housing projects don't get built that quickly in tiny, landlocked cities. Cutting the counter-productive tax incentives for tech should be on the very short list of ideas for restoring sanity to SF.
    - Decade 9y ago
      I admit that “supply and demand” is not the cause of the housing crisis. It merely explains the high price of housing (with minor contributions from a bunch of other factors[0][1]). I feel that supply and demand is most useful as an intuitive appeal to balance: There is way more demand than supply,[2] of course we suffer from a shortage. The cause of the crisis is the array of regulations against homebuilding, that caused the shortage. As you say, developers build in times of increasing demand, yet there hasn’t been a real building boom since the early 1990s.[3] In a normal situation, increasing prosperity would bring both jobs and homes to an area. Here, we have the jobs but not the homes.[4] The developers intimately know how price is caused by supply and demand, and do not build unless they are reasonably certain that they can make a profit. They avoid causing gluts. The problem here is that California has some of the most misguided regulations,[5][6] and municipalities some of the worst processes,[7][8] that prevent housing from being affordable to build.[9] Developers can’t be certain to make back their investment when housing is not in crisis, and we need to fix this. Like sea urchins in a kelp desert,[10] mega-developers with large projects are not the core issue. Mega-developers work best when trampling over pristine wilderness. We need to build inside cities.[11] The core issue is that we collectively do not have the imagination to enable thousands of small-time landowners to undercut the mega-developers with naturally affordable housing.[12] Zoning makes it illegal,[13] and government process makes it impractical, for ordinary non-developer people to build around here. The Republican mantra is that “Government is the problem.” But at the local level, the government is the people, or a funhouse subset of them. The policies that create the housing crisis enjoy bipartisan support. My support for the YIMBY Party[14] is not about supply and demand. It’s about creating a political demographic for getting people into humane homes. [0] http://www.sightline.org/2017/07/05/stop-blaming-foreign-home-buyers/ http://www.sightline.org/2017/07/05/stop-blaming-foreign-hom... [1] https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-tax-deductions-economists-hate/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-tax-deductions-econ... [2] https://sf.curbed.com/2016/10/12/12945854/bay-area-cities-jobs-housing-san-jose-palo-alto-sf https://sf.curbed.com/2016/10/12/12945854/bay-area-cities-jo... [3] https://twitter.com/mottsmith/status/856553360278736896/photo/1 https://twitter.com/mottsmith/status/856553360278736896/phot... [4] https://sf.curbed.com/2017/7/26/16040938/san-francisco-jobs-housing-ratio-homes https://sf.curbed.com/2017/7/26/16040938/san-francisco-jobs-... [5] http://www.builderonline.com/building/regulation-policy/the-unintended-consequences-of-law_o http://www.builderonline.com/building/regulation-policy/the-... [6] http://www.spur.org/publications/urbanist-article/2003-07-01/more-ceqa-delays http://www.spur.org/publications/urbanist-article/2003-07-01... [7] https://sf.curbed.com/2013/4/3/10257506/navigating-the-treacherous-and-tumultuous-san-francisco-permitting https://sf.curbed.com/2013/4/3/10257506/navigating-the-treac... [8] http://www.oaklandmagazine.com/May-2017/The-Real-Cause-of-Gentrification/ http://www.oaklandmagazine.com/May-2017/The-Real-Cause-of-Ge... [9] https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2016/6/15/affordable-housing-that-might-have-been https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2016/6/15/affordable-hou... [10] https://cdfwmarine.wordpress.com/2016/03/30/perfect-storm-decimates-kelp/ https://cdfwmarine.wordpress.com/2016/03/30/perfect-storm-de... [11] http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-housing-climate-change-goals-20170306-story.html http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-housing-climate-ch... [12] https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/6/12/the-power-of-growing-incrementally https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/6/12/the-power-of-g... [13] https://www.curbed.com/2017/3/7/14837014/affordable-housing-zoning-nimbys-art https://www.curbed.com/2017/3/7/14837014/affordable-housing-... [14] http://www.sfyimby.org http://www.sfyimby.org
- closeparen 9y ago
  There is no such thing as "invading" your own country. The level at which we can make such claims, and implement such controls, is the national border. The equal protection clause of the Constitution establishes freedom of movement for all Americans. Native and longtime San Franciscans have no more or less right to be there than the Iowans and Wisconsinites flooding in. If you want to change that, then secede from the United States.
geebee 9y ago
"The victims are the teachers, firefighters, artists, nurses, secretaries, and everyone else who isn't a programmer." I'm coming late to this just to make a narrow point, but I'm not sure you should put nurses into that sentence. Take a look at US News Best Jobs and see a roundup of BLS stats for salaries in San Francisco. Registered Nurses earn a median salary of $133,650 in San Francisco https://money.usnews.com/careers/best-jobs/registered-nurse/salary https://money.usnews.com/careers/best-jobs/registered-nurse/... A software developer in SF earns a median salary of $117,770 https://money.usnews.com/careers/best-jobs/software-developer/salary https://money.usnews.com/careers/best-jobs/software-develope... Now, that does seem suspiciously low to me (in San Jose, the salary is over $140k). And every time I mention this, I am careful to point out that I have no objection whatsoever to nurses making lots of money, more than programmers. It's a tough and important job that deserves good pay, and while I wouldn't argue that it should pay more, I certainly wouldn't argue that it shouldn't, either (I do think programming is a tougher and more stressful job than people generally realize). But the notion that programmers with their high pay are driving out nurses seems a stretch. I would argue that programmer compensation is higher than what is cited here, and there are other factors. But none of this is enough, to me, to overcome these numbers. While low income people are driven out of SF by the presence of higher earning workers, I don't think you can really say Nurses are driven out by programmers. Doesn't really work. And programmers, I assure you, are most definitely hurt by the high housing costs in SF.

timr 9y ago

"The victims are the teachers, firefighters, artists, nurses, secretaries, and everyone else who isn't a programmer." OK...but that's also an argument for creating public policy that discourages tech companies from locating in the city. We could start by eliminating the mid-Market tax incentives. The "yimby" movement is at least as much about tech companies who have invaded and now want to change their environment, as it is "everyone else who isn't a programmer." I wish we could be honest about that fact.

Decade 9y ago
The housing crisis is much MUCH older than the tech boom. From your privileged position, with lots of income relative to normal Americans, there wasn’t a crisis until you couldn’t afford San Francisco. My parents are poor, so I watched the market from the bottom end. What I experienced was that the amount we paid for what we got was sort of dumb, but at least we could afford an illegal in-law. Then, in the early 1990s, we got an OMI eviction and moved in with relatives. And now I’m paying twice as much for a fourth of the space in the same neighborhood, while my parents were ripped from their communities and moved out of the Bay Area. For the low end of the market, any restriction will make housing more scarce, and San Francisco is not short on restrictions. That is why I support the YIMBY movement. https://sf.curbed.com/2013/4/3/10257506/navigating-the-treacherous-and-tumultuous-san-francisco-permitting https://sf.curbed.com/2013/4/3/10257506/navigating-the-treac... Even without the tech boom, California hasn’t been keeping up with housing demand: “Every generation, civilization is invaded by barbarians - we call them ‘children.’” - Hannah Arendt http://ochousingnews.com/california-nimbys-dont-love-children/ http://ochousingnews.com/california-nimbys-dont-love-childre...
- timr 9y ago
  "The housing crisis is much MUCH older than the tech boom." Except, it isn't. As I've documented in this thread, like most American cities, the SF population was declining for ~30 years, until the mid/late 1980s. The first tech boom really kicked things off for local real estate again, starting in the early 90s...which was the last time the city saw a building boom. Developers build in times of increasing demand, and that's exactly what happens in SF. In any case, repeating the "supply and demand" mantra doesn't change basic facts about the timing and cause of this boom. The problem is not that developers "didn't build enough" in 1980...it's that we've disproportionately grown demand starting in ~2012, and large housing projects don't get built that quickly in tiny, landlocked cities. Cutting the counter-productive tax incentives for tech should be on the very short list of ideas for restoring sanity to SF.
  - Decade 9y ago
    I admit that “supply and demand” is not the cause of the housing crisis. It merely explains the high price of housing (with minor contributions from a bunch of other factors[0][1]). I feel that supply and demand is most useful as an intuitive appeal to balance: There is way more demand than supply,[2] of course we suffer from a shortage. The cause of the crisis is the array of regulations against homebuilding, that caused the shortage. As you say, developers build in times of increasing demand, yet there hasn’t been a real building boom since the early 1990s.[3] In a normal situation, increasing prosperity would bring both jobs and homes to an area. Here, we have the jobs but not the homes.[4] The developers intimately know how price is caused by supply and demand, and do not build unless they are reasonably certain that they can make a profit. They avoid causing gluts. The problem here is that California has some of the most misguided regulations,[5][6] and municipalities some of the worst processes,[7][8] that prevent housing from being affordable to build.[9] Developers can’t be certain to make back their investment when housing is not in crisis, and we need to fix this. Like sea urchins in a kelp desert,[10] mega-developers with large projects are not the core issue. Mega-developers work best when trampling over pristine wilderness. We need to build inside cities.[11] The core issue is that we collectively do not have the imagination to enable thousands of small-time landowners to undercut the mega-developers with naturally affordable housing.[12] Zoning makes it illegal,[13] and government process makes it impractical, for ordinary non-developer people to build around here. The Republican mantra is that “Government is the problem.” But at the local level, the government is the people, or a funhouse subset of them. The policies that create the housing crisis enjoy bipartisan support. My support for the YIMBY Party[14] is not about supply and demand. It’s about creating a political demographic for getting people into humane homes. [0] http://www.sightline.org/2017/07/05/stop-blaming-foreign-home-buyers/ http://www.sightline.org/2017/07/05/stop-blaming-foreign-hom... [1] https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-tax-deductions-economists-hate/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-tax-deductions-econ... [2] https://sf.curbed.com/2016/10/12/12945854/bay-area-cities-jobs-housing-san-jose-palo-alto-sf https://sf.curbed.com/2016/10/12/12945854/bay-area-cities-jo... [3] https://twitter.com/mottsmith/status/856553360278736896/photo/1 https://twitter.com/mottsmith/status/856553360278736896/phot... [4] https://sf.curbed.com/2017/7/26/16040938/san-francisco-jobs-housing-ratio-homes https://sf.curbed.com/2017/7/26/16040938/san-francisco-jobs-... [5] http://www.builderonline.com/building/regulation-policy/the-unintended-consequences-of-law_o http://www.builderonline.com/building/regulation-policy/the-... [6] http://www.spur.org/publications/urbanist-article/2003-07-01/more-ceqa-delays http://www.spur.org/publications/urbanist-article/2003-07-01... [7] https://sf.curbed.com/2013/4/3/10257506/navigating-the-treacherous-and-tumultuous-san-francisco-permitting https://sf.curbed.com/2013/4/3/10257506/navigating-the-treac... [8] http://www.oaklandmagazine.com/May-2017/The-Real-Cause-of-Gentrification/ http://www.oaklandmagazine.com/May-2017/The-Real-Cause-of-Ge... [9] https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2016/6/15/affordable-housing-that-might-have-been https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2016/6/15/affordable-hou... [10] https://cdfwmarine.wordpress.com/2016/03/30/perfect-storm-decimates-kelp/ https://cdfwmarine.wordpress.com/2016/03/30/perfect-storm-de... [11] http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-housing-climate-change-goals-20170306-story.html http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-housing-climate-ch... [12] https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/6/12/the-power-of-growing-incrementally https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/6/12/the-power-of-g... [13] https://www.curbed.com/2017/3/7/14837014/affordable-housing-zoning-nimbys-art https://www.curbed.com/2017/3/7/14837014/affordable-housing-... [14] http://www.sfyimby.org http://www.sfyimby.org
closeparen 9y ago
There is no such thing as "invading" your own country. The level at which we can make such claims, and implement such controls, is the national border. The equal protection clause of the Constitution establishes freedom of movement for all Americans. Native and longtime San Franciscans have no more or less right to be there than the Iowans and Wisconsinites flooding in. If you want to change that, then secede from the United States.

geebee 9y ago

"The victims are the teachers, firefighters, artists, nurses, secretaries, and everyone else who isn't a programmer." I'm coming late to this just to make a narrow point, but I'm not sure you should put nurses into that sentence. Take a look at US News Best Jobs and see a roundup of BLS stats for salaries in San Francisco. Registered Nurses earn a median salary of $133,650 in San Francisco https://money.usnews.com/careers/best-jobs/registered-nurse/salary https://money.usnews.com/careers/best-jobs/registered-nurse/... A software developer in SF earns a median salary of $117,770 https://money.usnews.com/careers/best-jobs/software-developer/salary https://money.usnews.com/careers/best-jobs/software-develope... Now, that does seem suspiciously low to me (in San Jose, the salary is over $140k). And every time I mention this, I am careful to point out that I have no objection whatsoever to nurses making lots of money, more than programmers. It's a tough and important job that deserves good pay, and while I wouldn't argue that it should pay more, I certainly wouldn't argue that it shouldn't, either (I do think programming is a tougher and more stressful job than people generally realize). But the notion that programmers with their high pay are driving out nurses seems a stretch. I would argue that programmer compensation is higher than what is cited here, and there are other factors. But none of this is enough, to me, to overcome these numbers. While low income people are driven out of SF by the presence of higher earning workers, I don't think you can really say Nurses are driven out by programmers. Doesn't really work. And programmers, I assure you, are most definitely hurt by the high housing costs in SF.