4 ms·

I can't verify with real numbers but my mental model is that votes on housing are not representative of the population. SF has a very high foreigner population

I can't verify with real numbers but my mental model is that votes on housing are not representative of the population. SF has a very high foreigner population that cant vote. They are moslty renters. US renters also might not live enough time in the city to register, be politically active, or end up moving due to lifestyle or economic reasons. And of renters you will have those that have rent control, which end up in tandem with owners about de-regularization. Im sure that if you put up a vote landowners and rent-controlled renters have a concentrated interest, and renters and foreigners dont have representation even if they are the majority. If you took all renters of SF in the last 6 years you might get a higher number than landowners but they cannot fight it politically. So I adhere to the notion of unrepresentative democratic outcomes.

rhizome 8y ago
US renters also might not live enough time in the city to register As of 2017, California has same-day voter registration. They can register on voting day.
- conanbatt 8y ago
  They need to be inthe city on voting day, and whatever the vote is they dont have the same level of intensity of interest than the homeowners. Lets look at the big picture: if everyone that lived in san francisco in the last 10 years voted to build more or to stop building, what would be the resulting of such a vote? I think the answer is obvious. And the fact that it isnt, is just lack of representation.
  - rhizome 8y ago
    Well, now you're moving the goalposts, but doesn't everybody have to vote where the voting devices are? Beyond that, your hypothetical is pretty loaded.
    - conanbatt 8y ago
      Of the group of people available to vote in the city, homeonwners will have a higher participation than renters that can vote. Becuse the latter need to match their residency with the vote, and even then, they dont know as much of the issue as the local, and even then, they dont have the same interest. (the time horizon of a renter could be 2 years, of a landlord its decades). Thats why I devised that mental exercise: if you gathered up all the poeple that lived over 1 year in san francisco in the last 10 years, which one do you think is in the majority? pro-supply, con-supply?
      - rhizome 8y ago
        Of the group of people available to vote in the city, homeonwners will have a higher participation than renters that can vote I've never heard this before. Cite?
jeffreyrogers 8y ago
The last time I registered to vote after moving I was able to do it the week I moved, when I went to the DMV to get my driver's license. I would imagine it's similar in the Bay Area. I think it's reasonable not to allow foreigners to vote on local political issues, just as we do on national ones. I wouldn't expect to have a say on political issues in countries I'm not a citizen of. Otherwise you don't have any skin in the game. You can just leave if you don't like the way things are going. I think part of the problem is there aren't clear policy proposals to solve housing issues so it's hard to get people to support them. Plus the good land is already developed so you'd have to use eminent domain or something to build affordable housing.
- conanbatt 8y ago
  > I think it's reasonable not to allow foreigners to vote on local political issues, just as we do on national ones. I wouldn't expect to have a say on political issues in countries I'm not a citizen of. Otherwise you don't have any skin in the game. You can just leave if you don't like the way things are going. Countries have fought their independence fighting under the concept of "No Taxation without representation". Reasonable or not I can assure you that foreigners pay the highest rents, have the least rent-control and less land in San Francisco.
  - jeffreyrogers 8y ago
    I'm not sure I agree about foreigners paying the highest rents, since it really depends what groups of foreigners you're talking about. SV tech employees? Maybe. Refugees? Definitely not. Rent control and land ownership are probably true, but again, that's true of foreign nationals working anywhere, not just in SF or the US. I think we fundamentally disagree on whether foreigners should have a say in local politics, so we can't really have a productive conversation on this topic while we remain divided on that issue.
    - conanbatt 8y ago
      > I think we fundamentally disagree on whether foreigners should have a say in local politics, so we can't really have a productive conversation on this topic while we remain divided on that issue. Not if you cop-out to Refugees, how many are they, 1000? Rental prices increases affect everyone and affect every single foreigner migrating into the bay are. It also affects people from other states, and those also cannot vote. When the situation becomes untenable they leave the city. The implementation of democracy can never be absolutely representative, anywhere, and in this situation that 'leaky implementation' is obvious.
koolba 8y ago
> Im sure that if you put up a vote landowners and rent-controlled renters have a concentrated interest, and renters and foreigners dont have representation even if they are the majority. If you took all renters of SF in the last 6 years you might get a higher number than landowners but they cannot fight it politically. What's interesting about this situation is that there are likely many people that work in SF that would vote for expanding housing but cannot vote because they don't live in SF, presumably because they cannot afford to. The system reinforces itself. > SF has a very high foreigner population that cant vote. Remember, this is SF we're talking about. Long term they're not going to let a lack of citizenship stop someone from voting: https://www.npr.org/2017/05/03/526703128/non-citizens-will-soon-be-able-to-vote-in-san-francisco-for-school-board https://www.npr.org/2017/05/03/526703128/non-citizens-will-s...
kcorbitt 8y ago
The voter laws also exclude people like me. I work in SF and would love to live in SF, but because of the high rental prices within city limits I'm living in Brisbane instead. I consider myself a natural part of the San Francisco constituency but have been disenfranchised by the city's artificially high cost of living.

rhizome 8y ago

US renters also might not live enough time in the city to register As of 2017, California has same-day voter registration. They can register on voting day.

conanbatt 8y ago
They need to be inthe city on voting day, and whatever the vote is they dont have the same level of intensity of interest than the homeowners. Lets look at the big picture: if everyone that lived in san francisco in the last 10 years voted to build more or to stop building, what would be the resulting of such a vote? I think the answer is obvious. And the fact that it isnt, is just lack of representation.
- rhizome 8y ago
  Well, now you're moving the goalposts, but doesn't everybody have to vote where the voting devices are? Beyond that, your hypothetical is pretty loaded.
  - conanbatt 8y ago
    Of the group of people available to vote in the city, homeonwners will have a higher participation than renters that can vote. Becuse the latter need to match their residency with the vote, and even then, they dont know as much of the issue as the local, and even then, they dont have the same interest. (the time horizon of a renter could be 2 years, of a landlord its decades). Thats why I devised that mental exercise: if you gathered up all the poeple that lived over 1 year in san francisco in the last 10 years, which one do you think is in the majority? pro-supply, con-supply?
    - rhizome 8y ago
      Of the group of people available to vote in the city, homeonwners will have a higher participation than renters that can vote I've never heard this before. Cite?

jeffreyrogers 8y ago

The last time I registered to vote after moving I was able to do it the week I moved, when I went to the DMV to get my driver's license. I would imagine it's similar in the Bay Area. I think it's reasonable not to allow foreigners to vote on local political issues, just as we do on national ones. I wouldn't expect to have a say on political issues in countries I'm not a citizen of. Otherwise you don't have any skin in the game. You can just leave if you don't like the way things are going. I think part of the problem is there aren't clear policy proposals to solve housing issues so it's hard to get people to support them. Plus the good land is already developed so you'd have to use eminent domain or something to build affordable housing.

conanbatt 8y ago
> I think it's reasonable not to allow foreigners to vote on local political issues, just as we do on national ones. I wouldn't expect to have a say on political issues in countries I'm not a citizen of. Otherwise you don't have any skin in the game. You can just leave if you don't like the way things are going. Countries have fought their independence fighting under the concept of "No Taxation without representation". Reasonable or not I can assure you that foreigners pay the highest rents, have the least rent-control and less land in San Francisco.
- jeffreyrogers 8y ago
  I'm not sure I agree about foreigners paying the highest rents, since it really depends what groups of foreigners you're talking about. SV tech employees? Maybe. Refugees? Definitely not. Rent control and land ownership are probably true, but again, that's true of foreign nationals working anywhere, not just in SF or the US. I think we fundamentally disagree on whether foreigners should have a say in local politics, so we can't really have a productive conversation on this topic while we remain divided on that issue.
  - conanbatt 8y ago
    > I think we fundamentally disagree on whether foreigners should have a say in local politics, so we can't really have a productive conversation on this topic while we remain divided on that issue. Not if you cop-out to Refugees, how many are they, 1000? Rental prices increases affect everyone and affect every single foreigner migrating into the bay are. It also affects people from other states, and those also cannot vote. When the situation becomes untenable they leave the city. The implementation of democracy can never be absolutely representative, anywhere, and in this situation that 'leaky implementation' is obvious.

koolba 8y ago

> Im sure that if you put up a vote landowners and rent-controlled renters have a concentrated interest, and renters and foreigners dont have representation even if they are the majority. If you took all renters of SF in the last 6 years you might get a higher number than landowners but they cannot fight it politically. What's interesting about this situation is that there are likely many people that work in SF that would vote for expanding housing but cannot vote because they don't live in SF, presumably because they cannot afford to. The system reinforces itself. > SF has a very high foreigner population that cant vote. Remember, this is SF we're talking about. Long term they're not going to let a lack of citizenship stop someone from voting: https://www.npr.org/2017/05/03/526703128/non-citizens-will-soon-be-able-to-vote-in-san-francisco-for-school-board https://www.npr.org/2017/05/03/526703128/non-citizens-will-s...

kcorbitt 8y ago

The voter laws also exclude people like me. I work in SF and would love to live in SF, but because of the high rental prices within city limits I'm living in Brisbane instead. I consider myself a natural part of the San Francisco constituency but have been disenfranchised by the city's artificially high cost of living.