6 ms·

> There is massive opposition within the poorer, non-white bay area community to the political group that Stripe is funding here. CA YIMBY literally shouted dow

by pc 8y ago

> There is massive opposition within the poorer, non-white bay area community to the political group that Stripe is funding here. CA YIMBY literally shouted down minority activists who were opposed to a housing bill at a recent protest. While no group is homogeneous in beliefs, polling very clearly shows that minority groups strongly support increased housing construction. (As does an overall majority of Californians.) On the micro level, groups like The 200 (community leaders of color) and experts like Richard Rothstein (author of Color of Law) have endorsed CA YIMBY's pro-housing policy work. See more at https://cayimby.org/endorsement/fair-housing-advocates/ https://cayimby.org/endorsement/fair-housing-advocates/. CA YIMBY was not involved in the protest you mention. I think you're confusing them with other groups.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
abalone 8y ago
I believe you are misrepresenting that letter when you say it "endorsed CA YIMBY's work." To quote it, "We note that some affordable housing and tenants' rights organizations have expressed concerns over SB 827. Recent amendments designed to safeguard local inclusionary zoning ordinances, protect local residents from displacement through a statutory 'right to remain' guarantee, and prohibit demolition of rent-controlled housing, which we applaud, helps to address some of these concerns." None of these amendments would have happened without protest from low-income and minority housing advocates against CA YIMBY's work. The letter "applauds" these changes and even supports "additional legislation to expand inclusionary zoning." It merely concludes that "the perfect must not be the enemy of the good" and recommends a compromise. This is far from an endorsement of CA YIMBY's work. In fact it reads as an endorsement of the opposition and resulting amendments. > While no group is homogeneous in beliefs, polling very clearly shows that minority groups strongly support increased housing construction. The minority groups who opposed SB 827 support increased housing construction -- just with better protections against displacement than what CA YIMBY has been pushing. To suggest otherwise is a false dichotomy. Thank you for the correction on which YIMBY group shouted down the minority housing activists.
- pcwalton 8y ago
  > The minority groups who opposed SB 827 support increased housing construction -- just with better protections against displacement than what CA YIMBY has been pushing. To suggest otherwise is a false dichotomy. No, they don't. Organizations like SFTU do not support construction of any market-rate housing.
  - abalone 8y ago
    You conflated housing construction with market-rate housing. And it’s not true. SFTU simply notes that for every market rate unit you need 0.25 BMR units simply to accommodate the resulting job creation (retail, restaurant, public service, etc.) That’s just to keep things where they are, which is already a huge staffing crisis for the service industry in SF. More like 0.5 BMR to make an appreciable impact.[1] This is something we all should care about if we’re not just here to make a quick buck. Long term we need teachers and cooks and waiters and artists to keep SF a desirable place to live. As PG himself said, “These independent restaurants and cafes are not just feeding people. They're making there be a there here.”[2] [1] https://www.sftu.org/2018/04/market-rate-housing-makes-crisis-worse/ https://www.sftu.org/2018/04/market-rate-housing-makes-crisi... [2] http://www.paulgraham.com/pgh.html http://www.paulgraham.com/pgh.html
    - lsc 8y ago
      >This is something we all should care about if we’re not just here to make a quick buck. Long term we need teachers and cooks and waiters and artists to keep SF a desirable place to live. The problem could also be solved, (assuming building more at market rate housing) by simply paying the cooks and waiters and artists more. I mean, I'm a sysadmin, which is also 'support staff' and also doesn't require a degree... and I'm getting like twice here what I would elsewhere. I don't see why waiters should be any different.
      - abalone 8y ago
        That’s a nice thought, but obviously you would see massive price hikes at restaurants and stores, and it’s likely that consumers would patronize them less. Macroeconomics rarely have such simple solutions. SF already leads the nation in raising the minimum wage. Tech businesses are a bad compare because the revenue per employee is typically much higher than the service industry.

by pc 8y ago

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

abalone 8y ago

I believe you are misrepresenting that letter when you say it "endorsed CA YIMBY's work." To quote it, "We note that some affordable housing and tenants' rights organizations have expressed concerns over SB 827. Recent amendments designed to safeguard local inclusionary zoning ordinances, protect local residents from displacement through a statutory 'right to remain' guarantee, and prohibit demolition of rent-controlled housing, which we applaud, helps to address some of these concerns." None of these amendments would have happened without protest from low-income and minority housing advocates against CA YIMBY's work. The letter "applauds" these changes and even supports "additional legislation to expand inclusionary zoning." It merely concludes that "the perfect must not be the enemy of the good" and recommends a compromise. This is far from an endorsement of CA YIMBY's work. In fact it reads as an endorsement of the opposition and resulting amendments. > While no group is homogeneous in beliefs, polling very clearly shows that minority groups strongly support increased housing construction. The minority groups who opposed SB 827 support increased housing construction -- just with better protections against displacement than what CA YIMBY has been pushing. To suggest otherwise is a false dichotomy. Thank you for the correction on which YIMBY group shouted down the minority housing activists.

pcwalton 8y ago
> The minority groups who opposed SB 827 support increased housing construction -- just with better protections against displacement than what CA YIMBY has been pushing. To suggest otherwise is a false dichotomy. No, they don't. Organizations like SFTU do not support construction of any market-rate housing.
- abalone 8y ago
  You conflated housing construction with market-rate housing. And it’s not true. SFTU simply notes that for every market rate unit you need 0.25 BMR units simply to accommodate the resulting job creation (retail, restaurant, public service, etc.) That’s just to keep things where they are, which is already a huge staffing crisis for the service industry in SF. More like 0.5 BMR to make an appreciable impact.[1] This is something we all should care about if we’re not just here to make a quick buck. Long term we need teachers and cooks and waiters and artists to keep SF a desirable place to live. As PG himself said, “These independent restaurants and cafes are not just feeding people. They're making there be a there here.”[2] [1] https://www.sftu.org/2018/04/market-rate-housing-makes-crisis-worse/ https://www.sftu.org/2018/04/market-rate-housing-makes-crisi... [2] http://www.paulgraham.com/pgh.html http://www.paulgraham.com/pgh.html
  - lsc 8y ago
    >This is something we all should care about if we’re not just here to make a quick buck. Long term we need teachers and cooks and waiters and artists to keep SF a desirable place to live. The problem could also be solved, (assuming building more at market rate housing) by simply paying the cooks and waiters and artists more. I mean, I'm a sysadmin, which is also 'support staff' and also doesn't require a degree... and I'm getting like twice here what I would elsewhere. I don't see why waiters should be any different.
    - abalone 8y ago
      That’s a nice thought, but obviously you would see massive price hikes at restaurants and stores, and it’s likely that consumers would patronize them less. Macroeconomics rarely have such simple solutions. SF already leads the nation in raising the minimum wage. Tech businesses are a bad compare because the revenue per employee is typically much higher than the service industry.