3 ms·

I have been asking someone..anyone..to give me an example of how building more housing leads to affordable housing. Like in real life.. Every high density over

I have been asking someone..anyone..to give me an example of how building more housing leads to affordable housing. Like in real life.. Every high density over crowded over built city ..and this is global..is unaffordable. It has expensive utilities, higher taxes and bad declining infrastructure that the government can’t seem to replace or upgrade. We have pestilence, rodent infestations, higher crime, big government and more taxes. I also don’t understand the fairness of a non house owning young majority with little or no financial intelligence or experience due to being educated by free public education and state nannyship getting to vote on imposing punitive high taxes aimed to displace the very people whose taxes and employment history and financial savvy that actually funded said free public education. Clearly this means that we have done a bad job of public education using property taxes. In fact, most of the wealth is accrued due to immigrant net worth and who didn’t even avail the free public school education. Wasting more public money on public education and using property taxes to fund said education is the real problem that needs fixing. There is no end to taxation. Especially because those who are not home owners can force more property taxes on the minority who own it. Put another way..why should someone who can’t handle their personal finances be allowed to make decisions at govt level. This would never happen with employment. How can the unsavvy have-nots have a say about punitive taxation upon the haves who get to gain nothing from the punitive taxes. This is especially crucial to ask considering that the government in Sacramento has a piss poor track record on managing money and shown a lack of transparency.

behringer 7y ago
What?? San Francisco has the worst rent in the world, excepting Hong Kong. It's 600 dollars more a month than the average in New York. 2000 dollars more than Chicago... That's entirely due to the lack of high rise housing.
- jelliclesfarm 7y ago
  Or maybe it’s due to lack of income. How about what do in Singapore? 97% of the population lives in state owned apartments on 99 year leases. Affordable to luxury homes for all income levels.
  - bbreier 7y ago
    How about some of the much denser megacities? For example, Tokyo, or Seoul? Both are far more affordable than the much less dense first tier cities of the US.
    - jelliclesfarm 7y ago
      Have you been to either cities?
      - bbreier 7y ago
        Yes, I've lived in both.
        jelliclesfarm 7y ago
        Ok. How do you think they are ‘far more affordable’ than tier 1 American cities? http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20171119000242 http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20171119000242 [..] Purchasing a residence in Seoul is now roughly on the same playing field as New York City, where the median price is about 443.4 million won. However, because average income levels in both the United States and Japan surpass Korea, the report states Koreans take on average three to five more years to purchase a house over those in New York or Tokyo. According to the data, it takes the people of New York an average 5.7 years to purchase a home, followed by 4.8 years for Singaporeans and 4.7 years for Tokyo residents. As for Seoulites, those with an average income of 47.28 million won require some 9.2 years to purchase a home. [..] How is their population density creating ‘affordable housing’ as you claim? Re Tokyo: the birth rate is on the decline and in the country side they re giving away homes for free to repopulate it. The public transport is excellent. None of these parameters apply to San Francisco Bay Area.
        bbreier 7y ago
        It is true that purchasing a home in Seoul is very expensive, but renting continues to be more affordable than in e.g. Manhattan or San Francisco https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/in/Seoul https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/in/Seoul A 1 bedroom apartment in the city center is about $742.84 USD per month, compared to $3,472.78 in San Francisco. That amounts to approximately ~33% of average net take home in Seoul vs about 50% in SF. You are absolutely correct that their public transport is excellent, and not only does that parameter not apply to the Bay Area, it doesn't apply to any city in the United States. San Francisco also has a population density less than half that of Seoul. Population density and infrastructure such as public transportation to support it are a difficult chicken and egg problem, and I don't know how to thread that needle in the Bay Area, even if I strongly feel it is a needle which needs threading.
JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago
I don't know if this holds water. Boomers who "bought in" during the 70s-80s (when prices were a much lower multiple of the median income) didn't have to make a public discussion of housing, because it was readily available to them. Had in not been affordable to those boomers, would have the silent generation said the boomers didn't deserve housing? As a public policy, it seems prudent to have home prices target some median of the income. If people can afford to buy homes, they are incentivized to stay in the area longer and establish strong community ties. That's why the U.S. Government heavily promoted home ownership post WW2.
- jelliclesfarm 7y ago
  They own because they existed. They were born before most of us did..To say that someone doesn’t deserve their wealth they earned in the past because they didn’t have to deal with today’s problems doesn’t hold water. Wealth is a construct built upon the notion of scarcity. One has wealth BECAUSE another doesn’t have it. If everyone had one million dollars, then a million has no value. Imagine I inherited a diamond necklace from my grandmother who inherited it from her mother and so on. The original price of it was $200 and today it is worth a million dollars. Yes, I inherited it. It’s mine. It’s valuable. Because someone else covets such a diamond necklace doesn’t mean that it is unfair that I inherited it. Most of the YIMBY arguments seems to be based on ‘unfairness’. How is it unfair to hold something of value that others covet? To be punitively taxed on an asset that one owns free and clear just because someone younger doesn’t own it is a gross violation of property rights. It’s also ignorant and misleading. Most of all, it’s immoral and petty.
  - JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago
    In the case of the city/situation discussed in the article -- Lafayette, CA -- would you believe it is unfair to step on the property rights of the landowner who wants to put 300 condos or 44 single family homes on the vacant land? It doesn't matter how the current owner of that land acquired it: for any of us to stop them, would be a gross violation of their property rights. Nobody is saying, just because the land you currently own is upzoned, that you have to tear down your single family home and put in multifamily housing. To suggest such would be misunderstanding the position held by YIMBYs.
tathougies 7y ago
> Every high density over crowded over built city ..and this is global..is unaffordable. It has expensive utilities, higher taxes and bad declining infrastructure that the government can’t seem to replace or upgrade. That's not true. Houston and Dallas are big cities without affordability problems. Sunnyvale, CA (quite dense, and becoming more so, but suffering from these NIMBY problems) is one of the safest cities in the country. Well below the average crime rate of many rural towns.
- jelliclesfarm 7y ago
  1. [..]In Sunnyvale, CA you have a 1 in 611 chance of becoming a victim of violent crime. Violent crimes include murder, rape, robbery and assault. With regards to property crime, you have a 1 in 62 chance of becoming a victim. Property crimes include burglary, theft and vehicle theft.[..] 2. Dallas and Houston are not in the same category as Bay Area. Texas is not California. 3. Crime in California stats are unreliable due to passing of Prop 47. Crimes are not reported or recorded or booked due to not wanting to incarcerate people. This has actually increased petty crimes all over Bay Area(I don’t know about other cities in CA..I do know about my backyard however)..you only have to subscribe to NIXLE to see that even those reported is increasing. The cops won’t even come to an ongoing crime scene unless someone’s life is in immediate danger. Wrt San Francisco..just type ‘Chesa Boudin’ in google news to see what’s happening in San Francisco. This is our lives and our backyards and built upon our tax dollars and work. It’s being auctioned away by those who have no stake and have never contributed to it. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_California_Proposition_47 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_California_Proposition_...
  - tathougies 7y ago
    > Dallas and Houston are not in the same category as Bay Area. Texas is not California. You're right, they're both much larger cities. The Dallas metro area is the 4th largest in the US, the Bay Area is 12th. So Dallas is bigger. > In Sunnyvale, CA you have a 1 in 611 chance of becoming a victim of violent crime. Violent crimes include murder, rape, robbery and assault. With regards to property crime, you have a 1 in 62 chance of becoming a victim. Property crimes include burglary, theft and vehicle theft.[..] According to https://www.areavibes.com/sunnyvale-ca/crime/ https://www.areavibes.com/sunnyvale-ca/crime/ you have a 255/100000 (my number is higher than yours BTW) likelihood of being a victim of a violent crime. Nationally, it's 381/100000 or 1 in 263. Thus, sunnyvale is safer. It is known to be safer even since before 2014 when California crime statistics were screwed up. The historical data is available online. You are a troll.

behringer 7y ago

What?? San Francisco has the worst rent in the world, excepting Hong Kong. It's 600 dollars more a month than the average in New York. 2000 dollars more than Chicago... That's entirely due to the lack of high rise housing.

jelliclesfarm 7y ago
Or maybe it’s due to lack of income. How about what do in Singapore? 97% of the population lives in state owned apartments on 99 year leases. Affordable to luxury homes for all income levels.
- bbreier 7y ago
  How about some of the much denser megacities? For example, Tokyo, or Seoul? Both are far more affordable than the much less dense first tier cities of the US.
  - jelliclesfarm 7y ago
    Have you been to either cities?
    - bbreier 7y ago
      Yes, I've lived in both.
      - jelliclesfarm 7y ago
        Ok. How do you think they are ‘far more affordable’ than tier 1 American cities? http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20171119000242 http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20171119000242 [..] Purchasing a residence in Seoul is now roughly on the same playing field as New York City, where the median price is about 443.4 million won. However, because average income levels in both the United States and Japan surpass Korea, the report states Koreans take on average three to five more years to purchase a house over those in New York or Tokyo. According to the data, it takes the people of New York an average 5.7 years to purchase a home, followed by 4.8 years for Singaporeans and 4.7 years for Tokyo residents. As for Seoulites, those with an average income of 47.28 million won require some 9.2 years to purchase a home. [..] How is their population density creating ‘affordable housing’ as you claim? Re Tokyo: the birth rate is on the decline and in the country side they re giving away homes for free to repopulate it. The public transport is excellent. None of these parameters apply to San Francisco Bay Area.
        bbreier 7y ago
        It is true that purchasing a home in Seoul is very expensive, but renting continues to be more affordable than in e.g. Manhattan or San Francisco https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/in/Seoul https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/in/Seoul A 1 bedroom apartment in the city center is about $742.84 USD per month, compared to $3,472.78 in San Francisco. That amounts to approximately ~33% of average net take home in Seoul vs about 50% in SF. You are absolutely correct that their public transport is excellent, and not only does that parameter not apply to the Bay Area, it doesn't apply to any city in the United States. San Francisco also has a population density less than half that of Seoul. Population density and infrastructure such as public transportation to support it are a difficult chicken and egg problem, and I don't know how to thread that needle in the Bay Area, even if I strongly feel it is a needle which needs threading.

JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago

I don't know if this holds water. Boomers who "bought in" during the 70s-80s (when prices were a much lower multiple of the median income) didn't have to make a public discussion of housing, because it was readily available to them. Had in not been affordable to those boomers, would have the silent generation said the boomers didn't deserve housing? As a public policy, it seems prudent to have home prices target some median of the income. If people can afford to buy homes, they are incentivized to stay in the area longer and establish strong community ties. That's why the U.S. Government heavily promoted home ownership post WW2.

jelliclesfarm 7y ago
They own because they existed. They were born before most of us did..To say that someone doesn’t deserve their wealth they earned in the past because they didn’t have to deal with today’s problems doesn’t hold water. Wealth is a construct built upon the notion of scarcity. One has wealth BECAUSE another doesn’t have it. If everyone had one million dollars, then a million has no value. Imagine I inherited a diamond necklace from my grandmother who inherited it from her mother and so on. The original price of it was $200 and today it is worth a million dollars. Yes, I inherited it. It’s mine. It’s valuable. Because someone else covets such a diamond necklace doesn’t mean that it is unfair that I inherited it. Most of the YIMBY arguments seems to be based on ‘unfairness’. How is it unfair to hold something of value that others covet? To be punitively taxed on an asset that one owns free and clear just because someone younger doesn’t own it is a gross violation of property rights. It’s also ignorant and misleading. Most of all, it’s immoral and petty.
- JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago
  In the case of the city/situation discussed in the article -- Lafayette, CA -- would you believe it is unfair to step on the property rights of the landowner who wants to put 300 condos or 44 single family homes on the vacant land? It doesn't matter how the current owner of that land acquired it: for any of us to stop them, would be a gross violation of their property rights. Nobody is saying, just because the land you currently own is upzoned, that you have to tear down your single family home and put in multifamily housing. To suggest such would be misunderstanding the position held by YIMBYs.

tathougies 7y ago

> Every high density over crowded over built city ..and this is global..is unaffordable. It has expensive utilities, higher taxes and bad declining infrastructure that the government can’t seem to replace or upgrade. That's not true. Houston and Dallas are big cities without affordability problems. Sunnyvale, CA (quite dense, and becoming more so, but suffering from these NIMBY problems) is one of the safest cities in the country. Well below the average crime rate of many rural towns.

jelliclesfarm 7y ago
1. [..]In Sunnyvale, CA you have a 1 in 611 chance of becoming a victim of violent crime. Violent crimes include murder, rape, robbery and assault. With regards to property crime, you have a 1 in 62 chance of becoming a victim. Property crimes include burglary, theft and vehicle theft.[..] 2. Dallas and Houston are not in the same category as Bay Area. Texas is not California. 3. Crime in California stats are unreliable due to passing of Prop 47. Crimes are not reported or recorded or booked due to not wanting to incarcerate people. This has actually increased petty crimes all over Bay Area(I don’t know about other cities in CA..I do know about my backyard however)..you only have to subscribe to NIXLE to see that even those reported is increasing. The cops won’t even come to an ongoing crime scene unless someone’s life is in immediate danger. Wrt San Francisco..just type ‘Chesa Boudin’ in google news to see what’s happening in San Francisco. This is our lives and our backyards and built upon our tax dollars and work. It’s being auctioned away by those who have no stake and have never contributed to it. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_California_Proposition_47 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_California_Proposition_...
- tathougies 7y ago
  > Dallas and Houston are not in the same category as Bay Area. Texas is not California. You're right, they're both much larger cities. The Dallas metro area is the 4th largest in the US, the Bay Area is 12th. So Dallas is bigger. > In Sunnyvale, CA you have a 1 in 611 chance of becoming a victim of violent crime. Violent crimes include murder, rape, robbery and assault. With regards to property crime, you have a 1 in 62 chance of becoming a victim. Property crimes include burglary, theft and vehicle theft.[..] According to https://www.areavibes.com/sunnyvale-ca/crime/ https://www.areavibes.com/sunnyvale-ca/crime/ you have a 255/100000 (my number is higher than yours BTW) likelihood of being a victim of a violent crime. Nationally, it's 381/100000 or 1 in 263. Thus, sunnyvale is safer. It is known to be safer even since before 2014 when California crime statistics were screwed up. The historical data is available online. You are a troll.