4 ms·

It appears you're saying that "A YIMBY's only valid political stance is to advocate for the destruction of the building they live in, otherwise they can be safe

It appears you're saying that "A YIMBY's only valid political stance is to advocate for the destruction of the building they live in, otherwise they can be safely ignored." I'm assuming I'm wrong, and I sincerely hope I am. "Saint or GTFO" arguments are pretty facile.

themagician 8y ago
I'm saying drop the fake YIMBY nonsense and just be honest about it. Stop pretending like we are all in this together and you are going to bear the cost the same as everyone else. It's Yes-In-Your-Backyard. It always has been and there's nothing wrong with that. I 100% support rezoning. Just not in my area.
- maym86 8y ago
  Do you rent or own a home?
  - themagician 8y ago
    I rent.
- mfringel 8y ago
  Using a literalist expansion of YIMBY doesn't seem constructive. Do you demand the same locality standard for people who block building housing and/or upzoning in places that aren't their domicile or directly adjacent to it? In your view, how close does someone need to live to construction to have a preference about whether it happens or not? It sounds like your metric is "they should be made personally miserable, so that they regret asking for it in the first place.", which is begging the question a bit.
  - themagician 8y ago
    Don't call your movement YIMBY when the YIMBY position is the exact same as the NIMBY one, but you want to feel morally superior. Both support building as long as they don't have to bear the cost. NIMBYs in the Marina support building in The Mission the same way Mission YIMBY supports building in the Sunset and Richmond. I live in Nob Hill. There's a unit going up across the street from me, but it's not that big and didn't affect me so I don't mind. I went to some of the meetings and had no comment. I 100% support building in San Francisco. Just as long as it doesn't affect me. And the reality is that's true for everyone. So we should figure out how to actually deal with that reality.
    - stale2002 8y ago
      It is absolutely not the same position. A YIMBY person would say "Yes, I support allowing people to sell their house and build an apartment building". A NIMBY person would say "No, I do not support allowing someone ELSE to sell THEIR house that THEY own, to build an apartment building". It is about rules that effect other people's property, and rules that ALLOW people to sell their property. A YIMBY person does not want the rules to exist, and a NIMBY person does want these rule to exist.
      - pessimizer 8y ago
        Both would say: I support apartments being built on land nowhere near my home. I think the point being made is that YIMBYs don't have yards, and they're advocating for policies that they have been convinced could get them yards, and NIMBYs are advocating for policies that protect the yards that they have.
        stale2002 8y ago
        No, a YIMBY person would be perfectly in favor of everyone being allowed to do what they want with their own property. A contradiction would be if a YIMBY person said "I DON'T want this person to be allowed to do what they want with their property." No YIMBY person is arguing for restrictions. They are arguing for removing restrictions, everywhere, and yes that means for their neighbors.
      - themagician 8y ago
        I like the reframing to pretend like this is about personal property. You can sell your property to whoever you want. But there person who buys it can't do whatever they want. That's how it works everywhere. This is about zoning, not who you can sell your property to.
        stale2002 8y ago
        It IS about property rights though. I do not have the right to build whatever I want on my property, and I would like that to change. I would also like other people to have the rights to build whatever they want things THEIR property. How does arguing in favor of rights for property owners make YIMBY people hypocrits? You are saying that YIMBY people are doing something contradictory. There is nothing contradictory of arguing in favor of everyone being allowed to do what they want with their property. This is absolutely a moral argument, as it is about people being allowed to do what they want with property that they own. Arguments regarding rights are moral arguments.
- ummonk 8y ago
  Exactly. In your backyard. Not on top of your home.
- manfredo 8y ago
  What is dishonest about YIMBY? I would totally be fine if the the 50+ year old 4 story apartment building I live in was replaced with a modern 8 story building.

themagician 8y ago

I'm saying drop the fake YIMBY nonsense and just be honest about it. Stop pretending like we are all in this together and you are going to bear the cost the same as everyone else. It's Yes-In-Your-Backyard. It always has been and there's nothing wrong with that. I 100% support rezoning. Just not in my area.

maym86 8y ago
Do you rent or own a home?
- themagician 8y ago
  I rent.
mfringel 8y ago
Using a literalist expansion of YIMBY doesn't seem constructive. Do you demand the same locality standard for people who block building housing and/or upzoning in places that aren't their domicile or directly adjacent to it? In your view, how close does someone need to live to construction to have a preference about whether it happens or not? It sounds like your metric is "they should be made personally miserable, so that they regret asking for it in the first place.", which is begging the question a bit.
- themagician 8y ago
  Don't call your movement YIMBY when the YIMBY position is the exact same as the NIMBY one, but you want to feel morally superior. Both support building as long as they don't have to bear the cost. NIMBYs in the Marina support building in The Mission the same way Mission YIMBY supports building in the Sunset and Richmond. I live in Nob Hill. There's a unit going up across the street from me, but it's not that big and didn't affect me so I don't mind. I went to some of the meetings and had no comment. I 100% support building in San Francisco. Just as long as it doesn't affect me. And the reality is that's true for everyone. So we should figure out how to actually deal with that reality.
  - stale2002 8y ago
    It is absolutely not the same position. A YIMBY person would say "Yes, I support allowing people to sell their house and build an apartment building". A NIMBY person would say "No, I do not support allowing someone ELSE to sell THEIR house that THEY own, to build an apartment building". It is about rules that effect other people's property, and rules that ALLOW people to sell their property. A YIMBY person does not want the rules to exist, and a NIMBY person does want these rule to exist.
    - pessimizer 8y ago
      Both would say: I support apartments being built on land nowhere near my home. I think the point being made is that YIMBYs don't have yards, and they're advocating for policies that they have been convinced could get them yards, and NIMBYs are advocating for policies that protect the yards that they have.
      - stale2002 8y ago
        No, a YIMBY person would be perfectly in favor of everyone being allowed to do what they want with their own property. A contradiction would be if a YIMBY person said "I DON'T want this person to be allowed to do what they want with their property." No YIMBY person is arguing for restrictions. They are arguing for removing restrictions, everywhere, and yes that means for their neighbors.
    - themagician 8y ago
      I like the reframing to pretend like this is about personal property. You can sell your property to whoever you want. But there person who buys it can't do whatever they want. That's how it works everywhere. This is about zoning, not who you can sell your property to.
      - stale2002 8y ago
        It IS about property rights though. I do not have the right to build whatever I want on my property, and I would like that to change. I would also like other people to have the rights to build whatever they want things THEIR property. How does arguing in favor of rights for property owners make YIMBY people hypocrits? You are saying that YIMBY people are doing something contradictory. There is nothing contradictory of arguing in favor of everyone being allowed to do what they want with their property. This is absolutely a moral argument, as it is about people being allowed to do what they want with property that they own. Arguments regarding rights are moral arguments.
ummonk 8y ago
Exactly. In your backyard. Not on top of your home.
manfredo 8y ago
What is dishonest about YIMBY? I would totally be fine if the the 50+ year old 4 story apartment building I live in was replaced with a modern 8 story building.