4 ms·
The bit about local restaurants losing business seems like a pretty thin fig leaf over a law that's really about taking tech employees down a peg. I don't live
by WallWextra 8y ago
The bit about local restaurants losing business seems like a pretty thin fig leaf over a law that's really about taking tech employees down a peg.
I don't live in the bay area, so maybe someone can fill me in. How is it supposedly so gentrified that nobody but software engineers can survive, yet local politicians feel comfortable doing things like this? Who actually lives in the city?
- bsimpson 8y agoRent control has bifurcated housing costs. Those who have lived in the same spot for 15+ years and/or who own their property have housing costs much lower than people who have moved this decade. A new lease on a 1 bedroom probably costs $3500 now, but could be <$1000 if you've been here for a while. "Progressive" SF politicians like Aaron Peskin pander to low-income renters and kowtow to NIMBY homeowners who don't want new housing built, while vilifying newcomers. "These evil techies are gentrifying your neighborhood - elect me to stop them." (Of course, the cost of living isn't just housing, but it's also the biggest factor in your assumption that "nobody but software engineers can survive.")
- themagician 8y agoThe area people are talking about is mainly Civic Center / Tenderloin. It’s the only are left in the city with real public housing, and it’s in the middle of the city. As a result of the zoning, it’s hard to gentrify. So what the city had been doing is giving huge tax cuts to companies to move into the area. But they move in and create a ivory tower that no one ever leaves. You see extreme poverty next to extreme wealth. The streets are filled with drifters, day hookers and an open air drug market and the people in the towers get chauffeured to and from work.