4 ms·

I have to disagree with this statement. Tech workers may feel the guilt, but many of the YIMBYs have no care in the world for the people they may be displacing,

I have to disagree with this statement. Tech workers may feel the guilt, but many of the YIMBYs have no care in the world for the people they may be displacing, are in favor of removing rent control because it would then give poorer residents the skin in the game needed for them to demand more housing. I can go on and on about this. Yes NIMBYism is a problem, but this goes well beyond the more market rate housing debate, people being against public transit improvements, housing for the homeless, and clinic for drug addicts are ones that come to mind.

epistasis 8y ago
That is definitely not true at all the leadership level (ie podcasts, official communications. In my experience it's not at all true at the local either. However, it is a common mischaracterization by outsiders that reflexively oppose YIMBY. For a while, it was common to say that YIMBYs opposes BMR and affordable housing in general, which is completely untrue. I guess it's shifted now to say that YIMBYs are pro-gentrification instead, which is absolutely counter to any high level communication or leadership discussion I've heard, or any local desires. If you have links to such statements, or people that I can talk to, I'd love to jump in on that discussion and point out with documentation how that supposed YIMBY is not representing a YIMBY viewpoint.
- zjaffee 8y ago
  Yes, the group California Yimby supports these things, but it absolutely hurts the Yimby movements credibility where they have allows people who spew the "Luxury housing will trickle prices down to the poor" shpiel are given a platform by them to display their beliefs. At best, any new construction that impacts costs will just lead to more upper middle class tech workers being in the bay area while continuing with the current pace of displacement we've seen already. YIMBYism isn't pro gentrification, but those who are pro gentrification will always be YIMBYs. And I can't provide direct links, just this sort of thing is all over YIMBY/NIMBY/PHIMBY facebook and twitter.
  - epistasis 8y ago
    Got it, those are venues that I avoid, preferring to look more at actual policy. I'd never step into facebook, but it could be beneficial to Twitter stuff, since it's fully public. How can CA YIMBY "allow" people to spew things? Are you honestly interested an assessment of YIMBY, or just looking for ways to discount them? If a neighborhood group has official communications that run counter to what a member says, do you go with what the member says or the group itself? Or, more pertinently, if a member of a tenants advocacy group lies about core YIMBY beliefs, does that discredit the entire group? No, of course not. Then again, this may just be the political naïveté of people that don't typically get into politics. Optics are not something that YIMBYs have really cared about, caring more for pragmatism. However, in California politics, optics seems to be more important than action or results. This leads to a lot of duplicitousness.
    - zjaffee 8y ago
      That last point is absolutely what I'm trying to get at, and it's not that they are allowing anyone to spew anything, but people are using the word YIMBY to mean what is essentially a "pro gentrification belief system". The word YIMBY has become toxic to the cause.
      - epistasis 8y ago
        If that's the case then it would be disastrous to abandon the YIMBY label and try a new one, because it capitulates to the false accusations, and completely tarnishes all of the ideas of the movement. No, the only counter is to further show the true YIMBY values through policy proposals, discussions, and political legislation. For example, the core YIMBY success so far is SB-35, "Planning and zoning: affordable housing: streamlined approval process." The same people that last year were complaining that YIMBYs are anti-affordable housing have now finally stopped saying that and have moved on to other misrepresentations of YIMBY. And in fact, they often now support SB 35, particularly as a way to prevent actions like SB 827. In the future, they will come to like SB 827, or at least some will. There's a ton of reactionary conservatism in nearly all political movements in California, even the leftist ones, because there's lots of older folks that run them and can't countenance a shift in the political landscape, particularly the emergence of a new political force. There will be lots of rhetoric, but that won't stop the change. So much in politics seems impossible until its done. Gay marriage in California was a similar through the looking glass experience. Housing will come around too. The more people say "that's impossible," the more optimistic I am that they will be proven wrong. Because that's just an admission that they hadn't really considered the possibility, the idea was just outside the realm of feasibility and thought. Eventually, the slow reactionary mind becomes comfortable with it, and reason breaks through. It will take several years, several years that we shouldn't have to waste, but there will be more housing in California.
manfredo 8y ago
I'm not sure I follow. The whole point of YIMBY is to increase the supply of housing such that new residents don't displace residents. If 10,000 people move into the city and move into 10,000 newly built apartments then no displacement needs to occur. Conversely, if NIMBYs block housing and 10,000 people move into the city with only 1,000 newly built apartments then 9,000 people are displaced. Sure, this is an oversimplification; people can live in converted living rooms, put bunk beds into 1BR apartments, etc. But the point remains YIMBYism helps prevent displacement, NIMBYism helps cause it.

epistasis 8y ago

That is definitely not true at all the leadership level (ie podcasts, official communications. In my experience it's not at all true at the local either. However, it is a common mischaracterization by outsiders that reflexively oppose YIMBY. For a while, it was common to say that YIMBYs opposes BMR and affordable housing in general, which is completely untrue. I guess it's shifted now to say that YIMBYs are pro-gentrification instead, which is absolutely counter to any high level communication or leadership discussion I've heard, or any local desires. If you have links to such statements, or people that I can talk to, I'd love to jump in on that discussion and point out with documentation how that supposed YIMBY is not representing a YIMBY viewpoint.

zjaffee 8y ago
Yes, the group California Yimby supports these things, but it absolutely hurts the Yimby movements credibility where they have allows people who spew the "Luxury housing will trickle prices down to the poor" shpiel are given a platform by them to display their beliefs. At best, any new construction that impacts costs will just lead to more upper middle class tech workers being in the bay area while continuing with the current pace of displacement we've seen already. YIMBYism isn't pro gentrification, but those who are pro gentrification will always be YIMBYs. And I can't provide direct links, just this sort of thing is all over YIMBY/NIMBY/PHIMBY facebook and twitter.
- epistasis 8y ago
  Got it, those are venues that I avoid, preferring to look more at actual policy. I'd never step into facebook, but it could be beneficial to Twitter stuff, since it's fully public. How can CA YIMBY "allow" people to spew things? Are you honestly interested an assessment of YIMBY, or just looking for ways to discount them? If a neighborhood group has official communications that run counter to what a member says, do you go with what the member says or the group itself? Or, more pertinently, if a member of a tenants advocacy group lies about core YIMBY beliefs, does that discredit the entire group? No, of course not. Then again, this may just be the political naïveté of people that don't typically get into politics. Optics are not something that YIMBYs have really cared about, caring more for pragmatism. However, in California politics, optics seems to be more important than action or results. This leads to a lot of duplicitousness.
  - zjaffee 8y ago
    That last point is absolutely what I'm trying to get at, and it's not that they are allowing anyone to spew anything, but people are using the word YIMBY to mean what is essentially a "pro gentrification belief system". The word YIMBY has become toxic to the cause.
    - epistasis 8y ago
      If that's the case then it would be disastrous to abandon the YIMBY label and try a new one, because it capitulates to the false accusations, and completely tarnishes all of the ideas of the movement. No, the only counter is to further show the true YIMBY values through policy proposals, discussions, and political legislation. For example, the core YIMBY success so far is SB-35, "Planning and zoning: affordable housing: streamlined approval process." The same people that last year were complaining that YIMBYs are anti-affordable housing have now finally stopped saying that and have moved on to other misrepresentations of YIMBY. And in fact, they often now support SB 35, particularly as a way to prevent actions like SB 827. In the future, they will come to like SB 827, or at least some will. There's a ton of reactionary conservatism in nearly all political movements in California, even the leftist ones, because there's lots of older folks that run them and can't countenance a shift in the political landscape, particularly the emergence of a new political force. There will be lots of rhetoric, but that won't stop the change. So much in politics seems impossible until its done. Gay marriage in California was a similar through the looking glass experience. Housing will come around too. The more people say "that's impossible," the more optimistic I am that they will be proven wrong. Because that's just an admission that they hadn't really considered the possibility, the idea was just outside the realm of feasibility and thought. Eventually, the slow reactionary mind becomes comfortable with it, and reason breaks through. It will take several years, several years that we shouldn't have to waste, but there will be more housing in California.

manfredo 8y ago

I'm not sure I follow. The whole point of YIMBY is to increase the supply of housing such that new residents don't displace residents. If 10,000 people move into the city and move into 10,000 newly built apartments then no displacement needs to occur. Conversely, if NIMBYs block housing and 10,000 people move into the city with only 1,000 newly built apartments then 9,000 people are displaced. Sure, this is an oversimplification; people can live in converted living rooms, put bunk beds into 1BR apartments, etc. But the point remains YIMBYism helps prevent displacement, NIMBYism helps cause it.