9 ms·

Agreed 100% I'm very involved with YIMBY Action here in SF: I'm on the board of both YIMBY Action and YIMBY Law, and I'm also running for local office in the c

by buss 7y ago

Agreed 100% I'm very involved with YIMBY Action here in SF: I'm on the board of both YIMBY Action and YIMBY Law, and I'm also running for local office in the current election: https://buss2020.org https://buss2020.org If you have any questions about YIMBY, send them my way!

davidw 7y ago
Nice work! It'd be fun to have a mini-meetup at the YimbyTown conference this spring; there seems to be an overlap of tech people and YIMBYs.
- buss 7y ago
  I'll be there! SF YIMBY will probably put on a happy hour or something
mrfusion 7y ago
Is the movement growing? Do you see a way forward?
- buss 7y ago
  We're growing a lot! YIMBY Action just brought in People for Housing Orange County and Peninsula For Everyone as affiliate clubs. We're in the process of expanding into Denver and NYC. The demise of Scott Wiener's SB50 this year has certainly been a disappointment, but we try not to pin our hopes on any single solution. It took us 50 years to get where we are, and we expect it'll take at least 10 to get out. That will be a combination of local, state, and federal action. The thing I've learned being involved in SF politics and YIMBY for the past few years is that politicians don't make change. They don't shift the discourse. Instead, it's grassroots movements like YIMBY Action that build a parade that politicians then jump to the front of. (Of course, this isn't true for Scott. He's one of the few true believers!) We're building a passionate and vocal community that can do the on-the-ground organizing necessary to make politicians court us. The way forward it to continue building a voting bloc. You only have as much power as the people you can turn out to vote.
  - DataWorker 7y ago
    Then why align with business interests against the interests of individual citizens? You know that most voters are not high paid tech workers frustrated by the lack of luxury mix used lofts. I’m sure with enough pr money from developers you can trick some poor folks into thinking a development boom will help them, but you are betting on ignorance. The economics are very clear; building in the Bay Area cannot lower prices. Build where it makes sense, outside the Bay Area, at a rate that’s optimal for people and the environment. Plenty of room in Livermore for high density, green, lower cost development. If we added a million people to north beach, it wouldn’t be north beach anymore. Is that the goal?
avocado4 7y ago
Are there any unfair obstacles you face as a newcomer trying to unseat an incumbent?
- buss 7y ago
  I'm not sure calling it unfair is necessarily correct, but the incumbents use ballot props to increase their name recognition. It works like this: - A Supervisor puts a proposition on the ballot - organizations funnel money into the campaign for the ballot prop - then when the ballot prop advertises they include names of the people running for office It's why SF has _so_ _many_ ballot props: they are the legal way to bypass the fundraising limits we imposed on individual electoral campaigns. Ironically, if we repealed our campaign finance limits, there'd be less dark money and far fewer ballot props. I don't have a ballot prop to attach my name to, so I have to do old-fashioned campaigning (with some modern, high-tech things, too :)
Reedx 7y ago
"I won't throw my hands in the air and blame a boogeyman, I won't ignore data because it doesn't fit my ideology... It's time we stop blaming everyone else and start taking responsibility." This is encouraging to see. I think Andrew Yang showed there's a real hunger for a solutions and data oriented approach, eschewing tribalism. Although perhaps still in a nascent stage, there finally seem to be signs of an increasing appetite for this. Good luck!
- buss 7y ago
  Thanks! It was a real bummer when he dropped out. I donated to his campaign and have a friend who was organizing for him down in LA. At least he made UBI mainstream!
tryitnow 7y ago
I used to be YIMBY, but I doubt more construction would lead to lower costs of living. When I researched this I couldn't find any strong evidence suggesting that more building would lead to more affordable housing. You would think that more construction would lead to more affordable housing, but it seems like more construction doesn't just increase supply, it also increases demand, which can offset any price effects from the increase in supply. This makes sense when you think that similar people want to live in proximity to people like themselves. So if there are more luxury condos in an area that's going to create demand for more high-end retail, which will enhance that neighborhood's appeals to wealthier customers which will then increase demand for more luxury residences. Vienna and Singapore seems to be cities that have overcome this trend. So I used to be an enthusiastic YIMBY, but there just doesn't appear to be any concrete evidence that more construction is going to lead to more affordable housing. Having said that, I do believe we should promote more construction, I just don't think it's going to reduce the cost of living to a sustainable level.
- nrp 7y ago
  The YIMBY argument mentioned in the article is that expensive new housing today becomes mid-range and eventually lower-end housing over decades as it ages. If you don’t put units into the front of that pipeline now, nothing comes out of the other end of it later. This seems plausible to me, and there is research stating the filtering effects may happen a lot faster than that on a regional level: https://www.citylab.com/perspective/2019/06/housing-supply-debate-affordable-home-prices-rent-yimby/591061/ https://www.citylab.com/perspective/2019/06/housing-supply-d...
  - moultano 7y ago
    More than that, "expensive" new housing is typically half the price of the single family homes next to it. It's just marketed as "luxury" because everything is. Typically the people protesting "luxury" housing already live in housing that's more expensive than what is getting built. The role of new construction in affordability is more direct. The people who live in the shiny new places will just bid up the price of the next best thing if it isn't available, and this ripples down until the people at the bottom are priced out. So by building it, you're preventing other things from being bid up.
complianceowl 7y ago
Wow, I just checked out your page. I’m not a Democrat, but I could see myself voting for you.
Retric 7y ago
As much as building housing is promoted, if your adding jobs 1:1 with new housing it’s useless. Are you willing to limit new office space until housing catches up?

by buss 7y ago

davidw 7y ago

Nice work! It'd be fun to have a mini-meetup at the YimbyTown conference this spring; there seems to be an overlap of tech people and YIMBYs.

buss 7y ago
I'll be there! SF YIMBY will probably put on a happy hour or something

mrfusion 7y ago

Is the movement growing? Do you see a way forward?

buss 7y ago
We're growing a lot! YIMBY Action just brought in People for Housing Orange County and Peninsula For Everyone as affiliate clubs. We're in the process of expanding into Denver and NYC. The demise of Scott Wiener's SB50 this year has certainly been a disappointment, but we try not to pin our hopes on any single solution. It took us 50 years to get where we are, and we expect it'll take at least 10 to get out. That will be a combination of local, state, and federal action. The thing I've learned being involved in SF politics and YIMBY for the past few years is that politicians don't make change. They don't shift the discourse. Instead, it's grassroots movements like YIMBY Action that build a parade that politicians then jump to the front of. (Of course, this isn't true for Scott. He's one of the few true believers!) We're building a passionate and vocal community that can do the on-the-ground organizing necessary to make politicians court us. The way forward it to continue building a voting bloc. You only have as much power as the people you can turn out to vote.
- DataWorker 7y ago
  Then why align with business interests against the interests of individual citizens? You know that most voters are not high paid tech workers frustrated by the lack of luxury mix used lofts. I’m sure with enough pr money from developers you can trick some poor folks into thinking a development boom will help them, but you are betting on ignorance. The economics are very clear; building in the Bay Area cannot lower prices. Build where it makes sense, outside the Bay Area, at a rate that’s optimal for people and the environment. Plenty of room in Livermore for high density, green, lower cost development. If we added a million people to north beach, it wouldn’t be north beach anymore. Is that the goal?

avocado4 7y ago

Are there any unfair obstacles you face as a newcomer trying to unseat an incumbent?

buss 7y ago
I'm not sure calling it unfair is necessarily correct, but the incumbents use ballot props to increase their name recognition. It works like this: - A Supervisor puts a proposition on the ballot - organizations funnel money into the campaign for the ballot prop - then when the ballot prop advertises they include names of the people running for office It's why SF has _so_ _many_ ballot props: they are the legal way to bypass the fundraising limits we imposed on individual electoral campaigns. Ironically, if we repealed our campaign finance limits, there'd be less dark money and far fewer ballot props. I don't have a ballot prop to attach my name to, so I have to do old-fashioned campaigning (with some modern, high-tech things, too :)

Reedx 7y ago

"I won't throw my hands in the air and blame a boogeyman, I won't ignore data because it doesn't fit my ideology... It's time we stop blaming everyone else and start taking responsibility." This is encouraging to see. I think Andrew Yang showed there's a real hunger for a solutions and data oriented approach, eschewing tribalism. Although perhaps still in a nascent stage, there finally seem to be signs of an increasing appetite for this. Good luck!

buss 7y ago
Thanks! It was a real bummer when he dropped out. I donated to his campaign and have a friend who was organizing for him down in LA. At least he made UBI mainstream!

tryitnow 7y ago

I used to be YIMBY, but I doubt more construction would lead to lower costs of living. When I researched this I couldn't find any strong evidence suggesting that more building would lead to more affordable housing. You would think that more construction would lead to more affordable housing, but it seems like more construction doesn't just increase supply, it also increases demand, which can offset any price effects from the increase in supply. This makes sense when you think that similar people want to live in proximity to people like themselves. So if there are more luxury condos in an area that's going to create demand for more high-end retail, which will enhance that neighborhood's appeals to wealthier customers which will then increase demand for more luxury residences. Vienna and Singapore seems to be cities that have overcome this trend. So I used to be an enthusiastic YIMBY, but there just doesn't appear to be any concrete evidence that more construction is going to lead to more affordable housing. Having said that, I do believe we should promote more construction, I just don't think it's going to reduce the cost of living to a sustainable level.

nrp 7y ago
The YIMBY argument mentioned in the article is that expensive new housing today becomes mid-range and eventually lower-end housing over decades as it ages. If you don’t put units into the front of that pipeline now, nothing comes out of the other end of it later. This seems plausible to me, and there is research stating the filtering effects may happen a lot faster than that on a regional level: https://www.citylab.com/perspective/2019/06/housing-supply-debate-affordable-home-prices-rent-yimby/591061/ https://www.citylab.com/perspective/2019/06/housing-supply-d...
- moultano 7y ago
  More than that, "expensive" new housing is typically half the price of the single family homes next to it. It's just marketed as "luxury" because everything is. Typically the people protesting "luxury" housing already live in housing that's more expensive than what is getting built. The role of new construction in affordability is more direct. The people who live in the shiny new places will just bid up the price of the next best thing if it isn't available, and this ripples down until the people at the bottom are priced out. So by building it, you're preventing other things from being bid up.

complianceowl 7y ago

Wow, I just checked out your page. I’m not a Democrat, but I could see myself voting for you.

Retric 7y ago

As much as building housing is promoted, if your adding jobs 1:1 with new housing it’s useless. Are you willing to limit new office space until housing catches up?