4 ms·
Not really. Your right to an unchanging neighborhood absolutely does not eclipse the right of a long-term renter's ability to stay in their community, or the ri
by zasz 8y ago
Not really. Your right to an unchanging neighborhood absolutely does not eclipse the right of a long-term renter's ability to stay in their community, or the right of a newcomer's desire to move to a better job. Plus, climate change. Sprawl and traffic are bad for the planet. California will never be able to meet its CO2 reduction targets if it does not discourage more driving, which we can only do by shortening the distances between where people live and where they work, and compressing the areas people live in.
- s73v3r_ 8y ago"Your right to an unchanging neighborhood absolutely does not eclipse the right of a long-term renter's ability to stay in their community, or the right of a newcomer's desire to move to a better job" Aren't the tech newcomers the ones that are threatening the long-term renters more?
- zasz 8y agoThe connection between NIMBYs and displacement goes like this: newcomers come in and increase prices of rentals, NIMBY homeowners refuse to build more housing, long-time renters are displaced by the newcomers who can afford more. Simple supply and demand. Tech is certainly part of the problem, but California has been underbuilding for the past 30 years. This problem goes way back, and it was made much worse by Reagan's massive cuts to HUD back in the 80s.