2 ms·
>Property value skyrockets for a while, and people who arent happy with it can sell and go live somewhere else with the money if they don't like it. This attit
by omegaworks 7y ago
>Property value skyrockets for a while, and people who arent happy with it can sell and go live somewhere else with the money if they don't like it.
This attitude is exactly why people are uncomfortable with processes like this. It ignores existing inequities of property ownership that have impacted wealth distribution.
If where you decide to build the station is like most of the bay, the people living in these homes aren't the owners. Especially if they're presently black or latino-majority neighborhoods, American housing policy over the last 50 years has purposefully kept these communities from gaining ownership equity by explicitly redlining them or locking them out of the credit market.
They won't profit from selling the property, they will simply be displaced.
- shados 7y agoWhen talking about NIMBYs who block these initiatives, what everyone tells me is that they're rich affluent white majorities, so my post was very much about how to handle those. No one ever talks about ethnic to minorities pushing back and being NIMBYs. But yes, if you're trying to dump a subway station in the middle an area as you describe, your point is totally correct. My thought is why I wouldn't want a skyscrapper popping in my backyard: because I can't easily get the hell out once the news drop.