6 ms·

I'm a renter in Oregon and I've been outspoken about this long before the laws were passed. From my experience, people who support heavy laws, regulations and t

by dgzl 7y ago

lawnchair_larry 7y ago
That’s definitely the general mentality in Portland, so I’m not surprised.
- dgzl 7y ago
  I fear Portland is close to some kind of serious breakdown, and I feel like they're not going to learn anything from it, only blame others who don't vote for hyper-progressive laws.
icelancer 7y ago
>> From my experience, people who support heavy laws, regulations and taxes don't spend enough time considering potential side effects. This is basically everyone. On today of all days, we see what the PATRIOT ACT USA has done to this country decades later, and people are quick to point that out but not consider it for laws that have not yet passed.
jacobolus 7y ago
YMMV, but in my experience people who use phrases like “Big Daddy government” and accuse everyone else of “pure ignorance” are typically not arguing in good faith.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- jonfw 7y ago
  This is a fair criticism, but attacking his credibility is irrelevant. He had no credbility to start with, this is an anonymous forum and nobody knows who that guy is. A strong counter here would include a counter-argument, and ideally even some support for that counter-argument.
  - freedomben 7y ago
    He's also not making an argument that requires any credibility: > I feel like an amount of the general public just wants Big Daddy government ... He's just stating how he feels personally. I would think most humans are for the most part qualified to analyze and describe their own feelings.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
pvelagal 7y ago
Well, i disagree with your opinion. Silicon Valley has been attracting a lot of people from lot of states, who all need housing. Remember , size of California is fixed. Housing in Silicon valley doesn't grow at the same rate as number of people coming here. Added to that, foreigners living in foreign countries ( who have never visited USA, who have no intention of living in USA) are able to own land/houses in silicon valley , and do that purely for monetary reasons, ie get more money out of the property , jacking up prices even more. An ordinary American who wants to live in California is suffering as a result of this. rent control or low income housing are essential tools to make ordinary Americans’ lives better.
- jmpman 7y ago
  The solution is more housing, not deincintivizing apartment construction.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- zamfi 7y ago
  > Housing in Silicon valley doesn't grow at the same rate as number of people coming here Bingo. And why not?
  - inferiorhuman 7y ago
    Bingo. And why not? Because California property owners don't want it to. The artificial scarcity drives up property values. Take a look at Brisbane, they fought residential development tooth and nail claiming that people should just work in Brisbane but live in San Francisco.
    - KibbutzDalia 7y ago
      Not true. We have a house and commercial rental property in Sunnyvale California. I’d love to tear down my commercial building and build something with an additional story but zoning won’t allow it. And is welcome all single family zoning being upgraded to 2 family zoning. I’d build a second unit in a heartbeat.
dwaltrip 7y ago
The market is simply a tool. It's not infallible. It is a very powerful framework, and enables amazing things. However, left unchecked, it will also create undesirable outcomes or side effects. Negative externalities are a real thing. In this specific case, perhaps you are right, I can't say. But your wide-sweeping declarations and general tone reveal your own harmful ignorance.
- kortilla 7y ago
  We’re talking about rent control, a system designed to attempt to dictate that supply and demand doesn’t exist via a law. A system with no economic foundation that creates worse housing everywhere it’s implemented.
Rapzid 7y ago
What constitutes a natural framework? IMHO, there is nothing "natural" about land ownership. Land ownership in the USA isn't actually what most people think it is. It's not an inalienable right and is largely at the pleasure of the public by way of legislation that can be changed.
- solidsnack9000 7y ago
  The natural framework of relevance is more to do with housing as a good or service than with land.
anigbrowl 7y ago
I'm a renter in Oregon and I've been outspoken about this long before the laws were passed. From my experience, people who support heavy laws, regulations and taxes don't spend enough time considering potential side effects. They feel like with enough support, they can just force anything they want to happen, while completely disregarding the market. You know I was neutral on this stuff, studied economics and some business law, have actually read Adam Smith rather than just little excerpts. When I was younger most of the 90s working as a tech in and around the financial sector, so while I don't consider myself an expert I do think I'm quite well informed. I spent about 25 years giving market economics and the investor class the benefit of the doubt. I've changed my mind.
- dcgudeman 7y ago
  Why?
  - anigbrowl 7y ago
    Because of the problem described in this story and discussed in this thread, among other things. I feel like that would be the obvious inference to draw.
- dgzl 7y ago
  I'm not following you... What did you believe, and what has it changed to?
  - anigbrowl 7y ago
    I believed in giving market economics and the investor class the benefit of the doubt and now I don't. You can interpret this in the context of the larger discussion and the news to which it is a reaction.

by dgzl 7y ago

lawnchair_larry 7y ago

That’s definitely the general mentality in Portland, so I’m not surprised.

dgzl 7y ago
I fear Portland is close to some kind of serious breakdown, and I feel like they're not going to learn anything from it, only blame others who don't vote for hyper-progressive laws.

icelancer 7y ago

>> From my experience, people who support heavy laws, regulations and taxes don't spend enough time considering potential side effects. This is basically everyone. On today of all days, we see what the PATRIOT ACT USA has done to this country decades later, and people are quick to point that out but not consider it for laws that have not yet passed.

jacobolus 7y ago

YMMV, but in my experience people who use phrases like “Big Daddy government” and accuse everyone else of “pure ignorance” are typically not arguing in good faith.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
jonfw 7y ago
This is a fair criticism, but attacking his credibility is irrelevant. He had no credbility to start with, this is an anonymous forum and nobody knows who that guy is. A strong counter here would include a counter-argument, and ideally even some support for that counter-argument.
- freedomben 7y ago
  He's also not making an argument that requires any credibility: > I feel like an amount of the general public just wants Big Daddy government ... He's just stating how he feels personally. I would think most humans are for the most part qualified to analyze and describe their own feelings.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

pvelagal 7y ago

Well, i disagree with your opinion. Silicon Valley has been attracting a lot of people from lot of states, who all need housing. Remember , size of California is fixed. Housing in Silicon valley doesn't grow at the same rate as number of people coming here. Added to that, foreigners living in foreign countries ( who have never visited USA, who have no intention of living in USA) are able to own land/houses in silicon valley , and do that purely for monetary reasons, ie get more money out of the property , jacking up prices even more. An ordinary American who wants to live in California is suffering as a result of this. rent control or low income housing are essential tools to make ordinary Americans’ lives better.

jmpman 7y ago
The solution is more housing, not deincintivizing apartment construction.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
zamfi 7y ago
> Housing in Silicon valley doesn't grow at the same rate as number of people coming here Bingo. And why not?
- inferiorhuman 7y ago
  Bingo. And why not? Because California property owners don't want it to. The artificial scarcity drives up property values. Take a look at Brisbane, they fought residential development tooth and nail claiming that people should just work in Brisbane but live in San Francisco.
  - KibbutzDalia 7y ago
    Not true. We have a house and commercial rental property in Sunnyvale California. I’d love to tear down my commercial building and build something with an additional story but zoning won’t allow it. And is welcome all single family zoning being upgraded to 2 family zoning. I’d build a second unit in a heartbeat.

dwaltrip 7y ago

The market is simply a tool. It's not infallible. It is a very powerful framework, and enables amazing things. However, left unchecked, it will also create undesirable outcomes or side effects. Negative externalities are a real thing. In this specific case, perhaps you are right, I can't say. But your wide-sweeping declarations and general tone reveal your own harmful ignorance.

kortilla 7y ago
We’re talking about rent control, a system designed to attempt to dictate that supply and demand doesn’t exist via a law. A system with no economic foundation that creates worse housing everywhere it’s implemented.

Rapzid 7y ago

What constitutes a natural framework? IMHO, there is nothing "natural" about land ownership. Land ownership in the USA isn't actually what most people think it is. It's not an inalienable right and is largely at the pleasure of the public by way of legislation that can be changed.

solidsnack9000 7y ago
The natural framework of relevance is more to do with housing as a good or service than with land.

anigbrowl 7y ago

I'm a renter in Oregon and I've been outspoken about this long before the laws were passed. From my experience, people who support heavy laws, regulations and taxes don't spend enough time considering potential side effects. They feel like with enough support, they can just force anything they want to happen, while completely disregarding the market. You know I was neutral on this stuff, studied economics and some business law, have actually read Adam Smith rather than just little excerpts. When I was younger most of the 90s working as a tech in and around the financial sector, so while I don't consider myself an expert I do think I'm quite well informed. I spent about 25 years giving market economics and the investor class the benefit of the doubt. I've changed my mind.

dcgudeman 7y ago
Why?
- anigbrowl 7y ago
  Because of the problem described in this story and discussed in this thread, among other things. I feel like that would be the obvious inference to draw.
dgzl 7y ago
I'm not following you... What did you believe, and what has it changed to?
- anigbrowl 7y ago
  I believed in giving market economics and the investor class the benefit of the doubt and now I don't. You can interpret this in the context of the larger discussion and the news to which it is a reaction.