3 ms·

Why blame the rich people rather than the system that allows them to abuse it? Rich people will always exist. The solution is to make it so that abuse is not po

Why blame the rich people rather than the system that allows them to abuse it? Rich people will always exist. The solution is to make it so that abuse is not possible. One possibility: create a state system for zoning and override every local zoning system. Let local zoning boards decide how to zone but make zoning be based on a tiered zoning system. Namely every zoning is a superset of the previous zoning. So industrial areas also allow every other type of zoning. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfm2xCKOCNk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfm2xCKOCNk

mulmen 5y ago
If you disagree with current zoning laws why would you want to weaken your ability to influence them by moving the decision to the state? Delegation of power to local authority is a central concept of American democracy. Do not throw that baby out with the zoning bathwater.
- mlindner 5y ago
  My post was actually about defining a system of zoning and forcing localities (if they want to allow zoning for industry at all) to also allow high rise housing and commercial in the same area as well. And anywhere that's zoned commercial also has to automatically allow residential. Localities can still choose how they zone, but the state sets the types of zoning possible.
onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago
Why would you assume a state system would be better and not even worse?
- markdown 5y ago
  Because local government represents just that locality... meaning a wealthy neighbourhood only has politicians elected and controlled by the wealthy. State govts have to appeal to a much wider demographic.
  - onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago
    >65% of voters are home owners.
newsclues 5y ago
Rich people own and control the system. Rich people have the power to change the system but they want to maintain the status quo because they are rich and powerful.
geofft 5y ago
I don't know about your state, but in my state, rich people have influence at the state level too. It doesn't seem axiomatic to me that rich people will always exist (I'm not sure I even agree that poor people will always exist, despite believing that the guy who most famously said it was divine), and one of the things I have learned from working in an industry with very rich people is that merely being rich is enough to let you influence the rules of the game. If someone was able to argue for tiered zoning, you can pay people to argue for un-tiered zoning. If there's a law preventing you from influencing local zoning, and you're rich, you can go change that law just as easily as it got created. If there's a law requiring certain representation on zoning boards, you can go lobby that representation. If there's a law moving zoning to an "apolitical" government agency, you can fund candidates willing to politicize it. And so forth. Making people not have that level of influence/leverage in the first place, hard as it might be, seems like the only viable solution.

mulmen 5y ago

If you disagree with current zoning laws why would you want to weaken your ability to influence them by moving the decision to the state? Delegation of power to local authority is a central concept of American democracy. Do not throw that baby out with the zoning bathwater.

mlindner 5y ago
My post was actually about defining a system of zoning and forcing localities (if they want to allow zoning for industry at all) to also allow high rise housing and commercial in the same area as well. And anywhere that's zoned commercial also has to automatically allow residential. Localities can still choose how they zone, but the state sets the types of zoning possible.

onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago

Why would you assume a state system would be better and not even worse?

markdown 5y ago
Because local government represents just that locality... meaning a wealthy neighbourhood only has politicians elected and controlled by the wealthy. State govts have to appeal to a much wider demographic.
- onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago
  >65% of voters are home owners.

newsclues 5y ago

Rich people own and control the system. Rich people have the power to change the system but they want to maintain the status quo because they are rich and powerful.

geofft 5y ago

I don't know about your state, but in my state, rich people have influence at the state level too. It doesn't seem axiomatic to me that rich people will always exist (I'm not sure I even agree that poor people will always exist, despite believing that the guy who most famously said it was divine), and one of the things I have learned from working in an industry with very rich people is that merely being rich is enough to let you influence the rules of the game. If someone was able to argue for tiered zoning, you can pay people to argue for un-tiered zoning. If there's a law preventing you from influencing local zoning, and you're rich, you can go change that law just as easily as it got created. If there's a law requiring certain representation on zoning boards, you can go lobby that representation. If there's a law moving zoning to an "apolitical" government agency, you can fund candidates willing to politicize it. And so forth. Making people not have that level of influence/leverage in the first place, hard as it might be, seems like the only viable solution.