4 ms·

Well, then, citation needed regarding "wealthy heirs with East Coast educations, [and] vestigial Mexican land grants, ...[whose] plan of record really is to blo

Well, then, citation needed regarding "wealthy heirs with East Coast educations, [and] vestigial Mexican land grants, ...[whose] plan of record really is to block all solutions to SF's housing crisis and wait for a recession," And, are you willing to even consider the possibility that people in the tech industry actually are "gentrifying techie scum," or, some significantly less loaded version of that? It's pretty indisputable that the tech industry has raised housing prices in the Bay Area, mostly because Silicon Valley is no longer a gigantic orchard. Basic economics says that when you take land and put it to a more productive use, as measured by how much money one can make using said land for said new purpose, the price of the land + improvements goes up. That's literally what's happening, and people are being forced out because of it. That's the actual definition of "gentrification." "Scum" is just a pejorative qualifier that would be used by those who don't approve of this dynamic, which, while it displays an ignorance of basic economic principles, is entirely understandable in terms of human psychology. And, it seems utterly stupid for these people to want to crash the local economy, just to get rid of the most productive sector of the economy. Unless there's some other master plan you're not elucidating, and, for which you'd need to provide an actual citation, Occam's Razor says this is absolutely absurd. Do you see where I'm going with this? The scenario you posit, in the terms you describe it, makes city leadership sound like a bunch of literal cartoon villains. While I don't believe they are immune from self interest, and the influence of money in politics, chasing that money away deliberately just doesn't fit in with the simpler "follow the money" scenario, unless there's something more to it than you're alleging. Edit: moved the bit about SF leadership being deliberately obstructionist to the correct quote.

jeffbee 6y ago
People who need housing are not gentrifiers just because they can afford it. The real gentrifiers are the people who 1) own land and 2) use the powers of government to prevent competition in the housing market. People like self-labelled socialist millionaire and tenants' rights activist Dean Preston. Let's count the ways the man fits my model: * Inherited fortune: check; also married into separate fortune. * Little Ivy education: check, Bowdoin * Is an elected official: check, Supervisor of District 5 * Blocks housing: check; has voted or acted against every project in SF for entire elected career. * Is actual gentrifier: check; used family fortune to buy existing Alamo Square mansion and the local working-class bar/venue Cafe Du Nord, Swedish American Hall. * Has never had a job: check * Is obscenely rich by socialist standards: check; aside from SF holdings owns many rural properties including 1 and 2. 1: https://www.landsofamerica.com/property/9241-Lone-Tree-Ridge-Rd-Boonville-California-95415/7952649/ https://www.landsofamerica.com/property/9241-Lone-Tree-Ridge... 2: https://www.landsofamerica.com/property/567-acres-in-Mendocino-County-California/7952490/ https://www.landsofamerica.com/property/567-acres-in-Mendoci...
- pmiller2 6y ago
  Okay, I might believe you if most of what you said weren't either factually incorrect, or misleading. Let's break it down point by point: * Inherited fortune - Questionable. All I was able to find on his family was that they were Holocaust survivors. Let's just say I'll give you that one provisionally, but I'd like to see actual evidence, if you have any. * Bowdoin - Correct. * Is elected official - Obviously. * Blocks housing - Does this sound like "blocking housing" to you: > Preston also introduced two ballot initiatives approved by voters in the election. Proposition I raised the transfer tax rate for property sales valued over $10 million, intended to fund affordable housing. Proposition K authorizes the city of San Francisco to build or acquire up to 10,000 units of affordable housing.[21]" [0] Sorry, does not pass the smell test. Moreover, "acting against" something is not even close to "blocking" that thing. You're redefining terms to fit your preconceived narrative. It's almost as if you have a personal reason to hate him. [1] * Gentrifier - Again, no, you do not get to redefine the term "gentrifier." If you think that's acceptable, then I can just redefine the issue out of existence, too. Sorry. * Never had a job: Incorrect per his LinkedIn profile. [2] As well, "Preston worked for a nonprofit called the Tenderloin Housing Clinic, where he fought evictions and did advocacy for tenant rights." [1] * Is obscenely rich by socialist standards: So, wait, now we're redefining "rich" in terms of "socialist standards?" No. Sure, he has a home in Alamo Square, which has a median home value of over $1M, and, if we accept without any actual evidence that he owns those other two properties you say he does, that puts the value of his assets at least at around $3M. But, we have no idea how much debt he has, so, his net worth could be rather pedestrian given he's an attorney in San Francisco. Sorry, not buying it. So, 4 out of your 7 bullet points are either factually incorrect, misleading, or completely unproven, and you expect me to believe you? Methinks thou dost protest too much. This just sounds like you have some personal axe to grind, which is completely irrelevant to whatever semblance of an argument you're trying to make. Did someone call you a gentrifier in the past, or something? If you could bring something that vaguely resembles a coherent set of facts, then I'll believe you. --- [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_Preston#Political_career https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_Preston#Political_career [1]: https://48hills.org/2020/10/the-sleaze-reaches-high-tide-in-d5/ https://48hills.org/2020/10/the-sleaze-reaches-high-tide-in-... [2]: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dean-preston-6454137/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/dean-preston-6454137/
shuckles 6y ago
San Francisco politicos have plenty of wealth and will not be negatively impacted by the loss of city revenue and jobs that an economic downturn implies. Here is Aaron Peskin, sitting supervisor living in a home bought for him by his parents at fire sale prices due to his own interference with the prior owner/developer, saying he wishes the air be let out of the tech economy, seemingly unaware that it is the low income service workers who have the most to lose: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/09/technology/in-san-francisco-and-rooting-for-a-tech-slowdown.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/09/technology/in-san-francis...

jeffbee 6y ago

People who need housing are not gentrifiers just because they can afford it. The real gentrifiers are the people who 1) own land and 2) use the powers of government to prevent competition in the housing market. People like self-labelled socialist millionaire and tenants' rights activist Dean Preston. Let's count the ways the man fits my model: * Inherited fortune: check; also married into separate fortune. * Little Ivy education: check, Bowdoin * Is an elected official: check, Supervisor of District 5 * Blocks housing: check; has voted or acted against every project in SF for entire elected career. * Is actual gentrifier: check; used family fortune to buy existing Alamo Square mansion and the local working-class bar/venue Cafe Du Nord, Swedish American Hall. * Has never had a job: check * Is obscenely rich by socialist standards: check; aside from SF holdings owns many rural properties including 1 and 2. 1: https://www.landsofamerica.com/property/9241-Lone-Tree-Ridge-Rd-Boonville-California-95415/7952649/ https://www.landsofamerica.com/property/9241-Lone-Tree-Ridge... 2: https://www.landsofamerica.com/property/567-acres-in-Mendocino-County-California/7952490/ https://www.landsofamerica.com/property/567-acres-in-Mendoci...

pmiller2 6y ago
Okay, I might believe you if most of what you said weren't either factually incorrect, or misleading. Let's break it down point by point: * Inherited fortune - Questionable. All I was able to find on his family was that they were Holocaust survivors. Let's just say I'll give you that one provisionally, but I'd like to see actual evidence, if you have any. * Bowdoin - Correct. * Is elected official - Obviously. * Blocks housing - Does this sound like "blocking housing" to you: > Preston also introduced two ballot initiatives approved by voters in the election. Proposition I raised the transfer tax rate for property sales valued over $10 million, intended to fund affordable housing. Proposition K authorizes the city of San Francisco to build or acquire up to 10,000 units of affordable housing.[21]" [0] Sorry, does not pass the smell test. Moreover, "acting against" something is not even close to "blocking" that thing. You're redefining terms to fit your preconceived narrative. It's almost as if you have a personal reason to hate him. [1] * Gentrifier - Again, no, you do not get to redefine the term "gentrifier." If you think that's acceptable, then I can just redefine the issue out of existence, too. Sorry. * Never had a job: Incorrect per his LinkedIn profile. [2] As well, "Preston worked for a nonprofit called the Tenderloin Housing Clinic, where he fought evictions and did advocacy for tenant rights." [1] * Is obscenely rich by socialist standards: So, wait, now we're redefining "rich" in terms of "socialist standards?" No. Sure, he has a home in Alamo Square, which has a median home value of over $1M, and, if we accept without any actual evidence that he owns those other two properties you say he does, that puts the value of his assets at least at around $3M. But, we have no idea how much debt he has, so, his net worth could be rather pedestrian given he's an attorney in San Francisco. Sorry, not buying it. So, 4 out of your 7 bullet points are either factually incorrect, misleading, or completely unproven, and you expect me to believe you? Methinks thou dost protest too much. This just sounds like you have some personal axe to grind, which is completely irrelevant to whatever semblance of an argument you're trying to make. Did someone call you a gentrifier in the past, or something? If you could bring something that vaguely resembles a coherent set of facts, then I'll believe you. --- [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_Preston#Political_career https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_Preston#Political_career [1]: https://48hills.org/2020/10/the-sleaze-reaches-high-tide-in-d5/ https://48hills.org/2020/10/the-sleaze-reaches-high-tide-in-... [2]: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dean-preston-6454137/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/dean-preston-6454137/

shuckles 6y ago

San Francisco politicos have plenty of wealth and will not be negatively impacted by the loss of city revenue and jobs that an economic downturn implies. Here is Aaron Peskin, sitting supervisor living in a home bought for him by his parents at fire sale prices due to his own interference with the prior owner/developer, saying he wishes the air be let out of the tech economy, seemingly unaware that it is the low income service workers who have the most to lose: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/09/technology/in-san-francisco-and-rooting-for-a-tech-slowdown.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/09/technology/in-san-francis...