4 ms·

Can someone explain how/why California has failed government policy? And why more government involvement in sectors would be a good thing? I understand the be

Can someone explain how/why California has failed government policy? And why more government involvement in sectors would be a good thing? I understand the benefits of central planning, but when I see it fail locally, I wonder if the flaws outweigh benefits.

njudah 7y ago
TLDR: The government is deeply involved in housing and development, as the government controls what can be built and where. This is an effort to loosen government controls by limiting local governments ability to restrict housing development near transit hubs. Specifically, the state government is attempting to restrict local governments' ability to create limits on housing density in certain areas.
- robertAngst 7y ago
  This is quite an interesting take, your state government is fighting local governments? This is truly another dimension of the More/Less government dichotomy they teach you in school. Btw, it seems the local governments are quite Anti growth? Am I understanding that correctly?
  - mixmastamyk 7y ago
    Yes, and not just in CA.
  - Gh0stRAT 7y ago
    Correct. The city council is elected by residents of the city, and land owners have a strong financial incentive to elect representatives who will limit housing. (The shortage drives-up their property values) You might think that renters living in the city would eventually outweigh the landowners and elect council members in favor of new housing, but instead SF passed a rent control measure which prevents the current renters from feeling the sting of the housing shortage so they aren't strongly incentivized to vote for more housing either.
    - throwaway34241 7y ago
      I'd also add that people who have long commutes aren't represented in the city they work in, although they have a voice at the state level.
    - snidane 7y ago
      It's funny to see the incentives at play. The rent control mechanisms are a hidden redistribution channel from money collected by income taxes straight to pockets of landlords. Ie. gov gives rent subsidies of $100 to poor. Landlords react by rising rent prices by $100 because od this new 'disposable income'. The poor don't feel any difference, only the working population which gets squeezed. The money flows from workers and businesses through the poor straight to rentiers.
      - overdrivetg 7y ago
        Assuming you aren't trying to intentionally throw shade on CA rent control: Rent SUBSIDIES are a hidden redistribution as you discuss. Rent CONTROL forces recent transplants to subsidize longtime residents Ie. gov prevents raising rents to market levels for longtime tenants. They are less likely to move, driving up demand for the remaining housing, which is the only stock available for newer residents. This then costs newcomers more, while longtime residents avoid paying the market rate on their housing - effectively subsidizing the in-place tenants.
friedman23 7y ago
>Can someone explain how/why California has failed government policy? The proposition system. People in California voted for laws that were in their interest without taking into account (or not caring about) the 2nd or 3rd order effects of the policy. The result is that existing property owners are reaping massive sums of money while the rest are struggling to make ends meet.
- MagicPropmaker 7y ago
  This is part of it, the other part is there are too many local governments with the ability to zone! There are so many "Cities" in California. Sunnyvale is a city, Cupertino is a City, Santa Clara is a city (in the county of Santa Clara). Each one gets to zone.

njudah 7y ago

TLDR: The government is deeply involved in housing and development, as the government controls what can be built and where. This is an effort to loosen government controls by limiting local governments ability to restrict housing development near transit hubs. Specifically, the state government is attempting to restrict local governments' ability to create limits on housing density in certain areas.

robertAngst 7y ago
This is quite an interesting take, your state government is fighting local governments? This is truly another dimension of the More/Less government dichotomy they teach you in school. Btw, it seems the local governments are quite Anti growth? Am I understanding that correctly?
- mixmastamyk 7y ago
  Yes, and not just in CA.
- Gh0stRAT 7y ago
  Correct. The city council is elected by residents of the city, and land owners have a strong financial incentive to elect representatives who will limit housing. (The shortage drives-up their property values) You might think that renters living in the city would eventually outweigh the landowners and elect council members in favor of new housing, but instead SF passed a rent control measure which prevents the current renters from feeling the sting of the housing shortage so they aren't strongly incentivized to vote for more housing either.
  - throwaway34241 7y ago
    I'd also add that people who have long commutes aren't represented in the city they work in, although they have a voice at the state level.
  - snidane 7y ago
    It's funny to see the incentives at play. The rent control mechanisms are a hidden redistribution channel from money collected by income taxes straight to pockets of landlords. Ie. gov gives rent subsidies of $100 to poor. Landlords react by rising rent prices by $100 because od this new 'disposable income'. The poor don't feel any difference, only the working population which gets squeezed. The money flows from workers and businesses through the poor straight to rentiers.
    - overdrivetg 7y ago
      Assuming you aren't trying to intentionally throw shade on CA rent control: Rent SUBSIDIES are a hidden redistribution as you discuss. Rent CONTROL forces recent transplants to subsidize longtime residents Ie. gov prevents raising rents to market levels for longtime tenants. They are less likely to move, driving up demand for the remaining housing, which is the only stock available for newer residents. This then costs newcomers more, while longtime residents avoid paying the market rate on their housing - effectively subsidizing the in-place tenants.

friedman23 7y ago

>Can someone explain how/why California has failed government policy? The proposition system. People in California voted for laws that were in their interest without taking into account (or not caring about) the 2nd or 3rd order effects of the policy. The result is that existing property owners are reaping massive sums of money while the rest are struggling to make ends meet.

MagicPropmaker 7y ago
This is part of it, the other part is there are too many local governments with the ability to zone! There are so many "Cities" in California. Sunnyvale is a city, Cupertino is a City, Santa Clara is a city (in the county of Santa Clara). Each one gets to zone.