5 ms·

I feel that these efforts to increase housing supply --especially in the Bay Area-- can only scratch at the problem, and very slowly. You would have to raze en

I feel that these efforts to increase housing supply --especially in the Bay Area-- can only scratch at the problem, and very slowly. You would have to raze entire neighborhoods, entire towns, and rebuild them with high-density housing, to meet the demand. So why is there never discussion of reducing demand instead of increasing supply? As in, put a limit on how many employees can be hired in the Bay Area by any company. Google, Apple, Facebook, Netflix, and all the rest bring in many tens of thousands of employees (and their families) every year. They crowd out the nicer apartments, making them unavailable and unaffordable to low-wage employees. And eventually the tech worker cashes in their fantastic stock growth and over-bids on a house, driving prices up. The suggestion of capping hiring in the Bay Area seems to be a taboo suggestion, not sure why. Seems to me, when your house is flooding from a broken pipe, first thing you do it cut the main.

cycrutchfield 5y ago
Because it’s way easier to just build more housing than enact draconian policies to prevent freedom of employment and freedom of movement. Think about what you are suggesting for a second.
- nitrogen 5y ago
  If you can upzone housing, you can downzone offices. Why isn't anyone building brand new cities shaped the way they want, instead of trying to force people out of where they live? I'd much rather live in a blank slate city designed the way I'd like, than constantly fight people who don't want me around.
  - User23 5y ago
    That's a great question, have you got any thoughts on why?
    - nitrogen 5y ago
      The topic has come up once or twice on HN before, so maybe try searching for "new cities" or something like that. - All existing land is already claimed by someone, or by the government. There are insanely large parcels owned by individuals or small groups. - Most existing water is claimed by someone hundreds of miles downstream. - The overall US mindset (there are definitely exceptions!) has changed over the 20th and early 21st century from one of maximizing tangible accomplishment, to maximizing financial gain and minimizing loss. We're playing musical chairs instead of making more chairs. - Mass media (Disney -- kid shows, superhero movies) creates the impression that the current geographic and cultural structure of society is the only possible structure of society, by making a few views seem ubiquitous, and everything else the domain of pure fantasy. - Prior attempts eventually got ridiculed, like EPCOT (ironically enough also Disney). People won't leave you alone -- they'll insist that any hope of new ideas is unforgivable hubris, and do whatever they can to make their ridicule a self-fulfilling prophecy.
  - dodobirdlord 5y ago
    Sure, but nobody at the local level wants to downzone offices. Those are their jobs. And they bring in tax revenue without requiring much expenditure by the local municipality. And their proximity skyrockets the price of all of the nearby real estate. There are perverse financial incentives that cause every city to want to be the city that people from the surrounding area commute to work in, but don’t actually live in. So downzoning offices isn’t going to happen at the local level. And it’s not going to happen at the state level either, because frankly it’s a silly idea to cripple your own economy.
- khazhoux 5y ago
  The word "draconian" is entirely subjective, and has no value in your argument. Your comment that I should think about my suggestion "for a second" is dismissive and assumes I haven't put any thought into it. Again, this has no value in furthering your argument.
  - cycrutchfield 5y ago
    I’m dismissive because I find your nativist “sorry, we’re full” (or more appropriately, “fuck you, I got mine”) attitude to be contemptible. Since you are the one in favor of curtailing the freedoms of businesses and people, the burden of proof should be on you to demonstrate why we cannot simply build our way out of this problem.
    - khazhoux 5y ago
      Again with the insults and dismissals. "Nativist"? "Fuck you, I got mine"? I have no burden. I already stated: it would be far easier to restrict hiring for the very large, high-salary companies, than scaling out housing to accommodate for the yearly influx of tech works with explosive earnings.
      - cycrutchfield 5y ago
        You made an assertion with zero proof. Do you think that dictating what businesses can do in terms of hiring has zero costs? That it won’t have a chilling effect on people establishing businesses in the area?
      - dodobirdlord 5y ago
        You seem to be underestimating the difficulty here by quite a bit. Cities can’t achieve a policy proposal like this, especially the large number of small legal jurisdictions that make up the Bay Area, and it would obviously have zero traction at the state level. The premise is ridiculous.
        khazhoux 5y ago
almost_usual 5y ago
This isn’t a communist country, the government can’t tell people where they can or can’t live.
User23 5y ago
California's housing shortage is due to mass immigration into the state and not natural increase. However immigration is sacred, and any observation that even hints of criticizing it is taboo. Observe.
- yuliyp 5y ago
  > California's housing shortage is due to mass immigration into the state and not natural increase. Is it? Certainly lots of people have moved to California, but lots have also left. Since 2000, California's population has grown by 17%, while the US has grown by 16%, and the world by around 27%.
  - 6gvONxR4sf7o 5y ago
    I only know the numbers for San Francisco, but it’s 37.7% from California, 25.2% from other states, and 35.6% from outside the US (62.3% total from outside the state)[0]. I’m sure the fraction from outside the Bay Area is even higher. Anectodally, I’m the only one on my team at work born within 6000 miles of here, and we can’t say with a straight face that tons of super highly paid immigrants (and even more open job posts) don’t affect housing demand. I’m from here, and have a lot of friends who left. The primary factor for most of them is wanting to afford a single family home, which is easier elsewhere. Restricting movement would be insane, but two thirds of the population being from migration is a huge factor in pricing my friends out, and it does kinda rub me the wrong way when someone from thousands of miles away complains that there isn’t cheap space for them here, and demands that we change the area to accommodate them. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_San_Francisco https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_San_Francisco
- khazhoux 5y ago
  You are going to be downvoted because your comment will imply racism, but I think it's worth an honest discussion. In the Bay Area in the last 20 years, I think I can count the number of non-hispanic gardeners I've seen, on one hand. The number of non-hispanic custodial workers, maybe on 2 hands. Restaurant workers, regardless of the cuisine and regardless of the restaurant price range, are also most often hispanic. Some people scream that hispanic immigrants are "stealing our jobs." I think, they're doing the job that white America now refuses to do. Without them, business couldn't survive. But as businesses have thrived --especially tech-- they're the first to get fucked by rising prices.
aluminum96 5y ago
> why is there never discussion of reducing demand instead of increasing supply There is discussion of reducing demand, primarily by attacking the tech industry. Example: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/sep/02/palo-alto-ban-technology-companies-downtown-patrick-burt https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/sep/02/palo-alto... Obviously, implementing such a policy at such a regional scale has major side effects, both on the tech industry and on America. The jobs and people have to go somewhere, and we are already exporting our housing crisis to other tech cities (Austin, Seattle, Portland) at an alarming pace. Eventually this will become a national problem.
- khazhoux 5y ago
  > The jobs and people have to go somewhere, and we are already exporting our housing crisis to other tech cities I hear you, but we are out of space in the Bay Area. Still lots of land in other parts of the country. And quite simply, there's too much money in the Bay Area --with that inequity leading to homelessness in the lowest wage earners-- and too little money circulating in other parts of America (with therefore no low-wage employment opportunities in all the necessary support roles).
  - aluminum96 5y ago
    > we are out of space in the Bay Area This could not be further from the truth. Consider: the Terraces at Lafayette, a proposed new apartment building that would replace an empty field. The City of Lafayette delayed the project for almost a decade entirely on spurious grounds. We are not out of space, it just feels like it because we refuse to allow our space to be used efficiently.
    - khazhoux 5y ago
      Eh, your example is on the other side of the hills, where yeah there's space -- and also horrendous traffic bottlenecks to get to/from the bay-surrounding cities. Which are out of space.
      - 5y ago
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

cycrutchfield 5y ago

Because it’s way easier to just build more housing than enact draconian policies to prevent freedom of employment and freedom of movement. Think about what you are suggesting for a second.

nitrogen 5y ago
If you can upzone housing, you can downzone offices. Why isn't anyone building brand new cities shaped the way they want, instead of trying to force people out of where they live? I'd much rather live in a blank slate city designed the way I'd like, than constantly fight people who don't want me around.
- User23 5y ago
  That's a great question, have you got any thoughts on why?
  - nitrogen 5y ago
    The topic has come up once or twice on HN before, so maybe try searching for "new cities" or something like that. - All existing land is already claimed by someone, or by the government. There are insanely large parcels owned by individuals or small groups. - Most existing water is claimed by someone hundreds of miles downstream. - The overall US mindset (there are definitely exceptions!) has changed over the 20th and early 21st century from one of maximizing tangible accomplishment, to maximizing financial gain and minimizing loss. We're playing musical chairs instead of making more chairs. - Mass media (Disney -- kid shows, superhero movies) creates the impression that the current geographic and cultural structure of society is the only possible structure of society, by making a few views seem ubiquitous, and everything else the domain of pure fantasy. - Prior attempts eventually got ridiculed, like EPCOT (ironically enough also Disney). People won't leave you alone -- they'll insist that any hope of new ideas is unforgivable hubris, and do whatever they can to make their ridicule a self-fulfilling prophecy.
- dodobirdlord 5y ago
  Sure, but nobody at the local level wants to downzone offices. Those are their jobs. And they bring in tax revenue without requiring much expenditure by the local municipality. And their proximity skyrockets the price of all of the nearby real estate. There are perverse financial incentives that cause every city to want to be the city that people from the surrounding area commute to work in, but don’t actually live in. So downzoning offices isn’t going to happen at the local level. And it’s not going to happen at the state level either, because frankly it’s a silly idea to cripple your own economy.
khazhoux 5y ago
The word "draconian" is entirely subjective, and has no value in your argument. Your comment that I should think about my suggestion "for a second" is dismissive and assumes I haven't put any thought into it. Again, this has no value in furthering your argument.
- cycrutchfield 5y ago
  I’m dismissive because I find your nativist “sorry, we’re full” (or more appropriately, “fuck you, I got mine”) attitude to be contemptible. Since you are the one in favor of curtailing the freedoms of businesses and people, the burden of proof should be on you to demonstrate why we cannot simply build our way out of this problem.
  - khazhoux 5y ago
    Again with the insults and dismissals. "Nativist"? "Fuck you, I got mine"? I have no burden. I already stated: it would be far easier to restrict hiring for the very large, high-salary companies, than scaling out housing to accommodate for the yearly influx of tech works with explosive earnings.
    - cycrutchfield 5y ago
      You made an assertion with zero proof. Do you think that dictating what businesses can do in terms of hiring has zero costs? That it won’t have a chilling effect on people establishing businesses in the area?
    - dodobirdlord 5y ago
      You seem to be underestimating the difficulty here by quite a bit. Cities can’t achieve a policy proposal like this, especially the large number of small legal jurisdictions that make up the Bay Area, and it would obviously have zero traction at the state level. The premise is ridiculous.
      - khazhoux 5y ago

almost_usual 5y ago

This isn’t a communist country, the government can’t tell people where they can or can’t live.

User23 5y ago

California's housing shortage is due to mass immigration into the state and not natural increase. However immigration is sacred, and any observation that even hints of criticizing it is taboo. Observe.

yuliyp 5y ago
> California's housing shortage is due to mass immigration into the state and not natural increase. Is it? Certainly lots of people have moved to California, but lots have also left. Since 2000, California's population has grown by 17%, while the US has grown by 16%, and the world by around 27%.
- 6gvONxR4sf7o 5y ago
  I only know the numbers for San Francisco, but it’s 37.7% from California, 25.2% from other states, and 35.6% from outside the US (62.3% total from outside the state)[0]. I’m sure the fraction from outside the Bay Area is even higher. Anectodally, I’m the only one on my team at work born within 6000 miles of here, and we can’t say with a straight face that tons of super highly paid immigrants (and even more open job posts) don’t affect housing demand. I’m from here, and have a lot of friends who left. The primary factor for most of them is wanting to afford a single family home, which is easier elsewhere. Restricting movement would be insane, but two thirds of the population being from migration is a huge factor in pricing my friends out, and it does kinda rub me the wrong way when someone from thousands of miles away complains that there isn’t cheap space for them here, and demands that we change the area to accommodate them. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_San_Francisco https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_San_Francisco
khazhoux 5y ago
You are going to be downvoted because your comment will imply racism, but I think it's worth an honest discussion. In the Bay Area in the last 20 years, I think I can count the number of non-hispanic gardeners I've seen, on one hand. The number of non-hispanic custodial workers, maybe on 2 hands. Restaurant workers, regardless of the cuisine and regardless of the restaurant price range, are also most often hispanic. Some people scream that hispanic immigrants are "stealing our jobs." I think, they're doing the job that white America now refuses to do. Without them, business couldn't survive. But as businesses have thrived --especially tech-- they're the first to get fucked by rising prices.

aluminum96 5y ago

> why is there never discussion of reducing demand instead of increasing supply There is discussion of reducing demand, primarily by attacking the tech industry. Example: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/sep/02/palo-alto-ban-technology-companies-downtown-patrick-burt https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/sep/02/palo-alto... Obviously, implementing such a policy at such a regional scale has major side effects, both on the tech industry and on America. The jobs and people have to go somewhere, and we are already exporting our housing crisis to other tech cities (Austin, Seattle, Portland) at an alarming pace. Eventually this will become a national problem.

khazhoux 5y ago
> The jobs and people have to go somewhere, and we are already exporting our housing crisis to other tech cities I hear you, but we are out of space in the Bay Area. Still lots of land in other parts of the country. And quite simply, there's too much money in the Bay Area --with that inequity leading to homelessness in the lowest wage earners-- and too little money circulating in other parts of America (with therefore no low-wage employment opportunities in all the necessary support roles).
- aluminum96 5y ago
  > we are out of space in the Bay Area This could not be further from the truth. Consider: the Terraces at Lafayette, a proposed new apartment building that would replace an empty field. The City of Lafayette delayed the project for almost a decade entirely on spurious grounds. We are not out of space, it just feels like it because we refuse to allow our space to be used efficiently.
  - khazhoux 5y ago
    Eh, your example is on the other side of the hills, where yeah there's space -- and also horrendous traffic bottlenecks to get to/from the bay-surrounding cities. Which are out of space.
    - 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]