5 ms·

>It’s unfortunate that the state senate doesn’t seem to want to treat the housing shortage with the urgency that it deserves. The state senators are probably m

>It’s unfortunate that the state senate doesn’t seem to want to treat the housing shortage with the urgency that it deserves. The state senators are probably making quite a bit of money off this housing shortage that they wouldn't make with an adequate housing supply on the market.

potatoz2 7y ago
It's much likelier that they are responding to the voters that have the time and money to make their reelection difficult.
- baddox 7y ago
  Okay, change "state senators are probably making quite a bit of money off this housing shortage" to "state senators are probably being awarded with a lot of power by supporting this housing shortage." Decision-making on the basis of wanting to be powerful is certainly not better than decision-making on the basis of wanting to be wealthy.
  - potatoz2 7y ago
    It's very different though, because in the former case the assumption is that direct financial benefit is blocking all chance of change. In the second you realize that organizing by different interest groups (renters for example) can easily change the calculus. Senators who are landlords will gladly vote against their financial interests to stay in office, by and large (or be replaced by senators who are will to do so).
- eli_gottlieb 7y ago
  Who are also making large sums of money off the housing crisis. I really don't think the State Senators are likely to consist overwhelmingly of renters, anyway: if their property value is appreciating, they're benefiting.
- 0xB31B1B 7y ago
  I think all 40 senators in CA own a home in CA and something like 65% own at least one unit they rent out. This decision is extremely frustrating coming from a legislature filled with landlords.
  - dragonwriter 7y ago
    > This decision is extremely frustrating coming from a legislature filled with landlords. Not only do the people have the power to vote out legislators, in California they also have the power to bypass them and legislate directly. But, while there is broad consensus that housing is a problem, there isn't broad consensus on solutions among the public any more than there is among legislators.
    - koboll 7y ago
      Homeowners are disproportionately likely to vote, so their constituents no doubt agree with them on this issue. The real problem is that when you incentivize and subsidize putting your net worth into a single large investment vehicle, and then let holders of that investment decide how much competition to it will be allowed nearby, it creates a vicious cycle of ever-increasing supply shortage. Eventually, of course, this will reverse. When the boomers die, renters will be the ones voting. But not before an entire generation has their net worth leeched by a geriatric vampire class of rent-seeking housing supply hoarders.
      - dragonwriter 7y ago
        > When the boomers die, renters will be the ones voting. When the Boomers die, their GenX and Millenial offspring will inherit their homes, oftentimes, in California, without a full-value tax assessment. And, as the relationships between wealth and voting propensity and wealth and homeownersip are both unlikely to switch directions, homeowners will still be overrepresented in the electorate, and there'll be a new generation of the geriatric vampire class of rent-seeking housing-supply hoarders, and a new generation complaining about them.
      - kofejnik 7y ago
- zapita 7y ago
  Probably a combination of both.
sidlls 7y ago
That’s why it amuses me whenever people point to this area as some bastion of leftist politics. This place has a decidedly libertarian tilt: socially permissive and very much laissez fair in many if not most ways.
- eli_gottlieb 7y ago
  There's a reason that "Fuck you, got mine"/"socially liberal, fiscally conservative" was named "the California Ideology", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Californian_Ideology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Californian_Ideology.
  - manigandham 7y ago
    That's outdated. California hasn't been fiscally conservative for over a decade.
    - eli_gottlieb 7y ago
      Call me when they repeal Prop 13.
    - sidlls 7y ago
      California is most definitely fiscally conservative. Taxes, and regulatory enforcement of leftish causes with real teeth are an uphill battle even with huge Democratic majorities, mainly because Democrats are basically a right-of-center party. America doesn’t have a left wing in its political landscape, at least not one with any representation or power. Sanders might change that, but I doubt it.
      - manigandham 7y ago
        California has the highest taxes of any state, and they keep getting higher. Citizens are taxed for everything while illegal immigrants get free driver licenses and health insurance. If you call that fiscally conservative then your political spectrum is completely off.
- 7y ago

potatoz2 7y ago

It's much likelier that they are responding to the voters that have the time and money to make their reelection difficult.

baddox 7y ago
Okay, change "state senators are probably making quite a bit of money off this housing shortage" to "state senators are probably being awarded with a lot of power by supporting this housing shortage." Decision-making on the basis of wanting to be powerful is certainly not better than decision-making on the basis of wanting to be wealthy.
- potatoz2 7y ago
  It's very different though, because in the former case the assumption is that direct financial benefit is blocking all chance of change. In the second you realize that organizing by different interest groups (renters for example) can easily change the calculus. Senators who are landlords will gladly vote against their financial interests to stay in office, by and large (or be replaced by senators who are will to do so).
eli_gottlieb 7y ago
Who are also making large sums of money off the housing crisis. I really don't think the State Senators are likely to consist overwhelmingly of renters, anyway: if their property value is appreciating, they're benefiting.
0xB31B1B 7y ago
I think all 40 senators in CA own a home in CA and something like 65% own at least one unit they rent out. This decision is extremely frustrating coming from a legislature filled with landlords.
- dragonwriter 7y ago
  > This decision is extremely frustrating coming from a legislature filled with landlords. Not only do the people have the power to vote out legislators, in California they also have the power to bypass them and legislate directly. But, while there is broad consensus that housing is a problem, there isn't broad consensus on solutions among the public any more than there is among legislators.
  - koboll 7y ago
    Homeowners are disproportionately likely to vote, so their constituents no doubt agree with them on this issue. The real problem is that when you incentivize and subsidize putting your net worth into a single large investment vehicle, and then let holders of that investment decide how much competition to it will be allowed nearby, it creates a vicious cycle of ever-increasing supply shortage. Eventually, of course, this will reverse. When the boomers die, renters will be the ones voting. But not before an entire generation has their net worth leeched by a geriatric vampire class of rent-seeking housing supply hoarders.
    - dragonwriter 7y ago
      > When the boomers die, renters will be the ones voting. When the Boomers die, their GenX and Millenial offspring will inherit their homes, oftentimes, in California, without a full-value tax assessment. And, as the relationships between wealth and voting propensity and wealth and homeownersip are both unlikely to switch directions, homeowners will still be overrepresented in the electorate, and there'll be a new generation of the geriatric vampire class of rent-seeking housing-supply hoarders, and a new generation complaining about them.
    - kofejnik 7y ago
zapita 7y ago
Probably a combination of both.

sidlls 7y ago

That’s why it amuses me whenever people point to this area as some bastion of leftist politics. This place has a decidedly libertarian tilt: socially permissive and very much laissez fair in many if not most ways.

eli_gottlieb 7y ago
There's a reason that "Fuck you, got mine"/"socially liberal, fiscally conservative" was named "the California Ideology", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Californian_Ideology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Californian_Ideology.
- manigandham 7y ago
  That's outdated. California hasn't been fiscally conservative for over a decade.
  - eli_gottlieb 7y ago
    Call me when they repeal Prop 13.
  - sidlls 7y ago
    California is most definitely fiscally conservative. Taxes, and regulatory enforcement of leftish causes with real teeth are an uphill battle even with huge Democratic majorities, mainly because Democrats are basically a right-of-center party. America doesn’t have a left wing in its political landscape, at least not one with any representation or power. Sanders might change that, but I doubt it.
    - manigandham 7y ago
      California has the highest taxes of any state, and they keep getting higher. Citizens are taxed for everything while illegal immigrants get free driver licenses and health insurance. If you call that fiscally conservative then your political spectrum is completely off.
7y ago