3 ms·

FYI: When someone uses the term “YIMBY” all I hear is “LANDLORD” and I don’t think I am alone.

TulliusCicero 4y ago
That makes no sense. Landlords tend to be opposed to YIMBY's, because allowing for more housing makes for a more competitive housing market, rather than one in which landowners dominate.
- nopenopenopeno 4y ago
  Why would landlords in the market with the highest demand prioritize fending off competition? The answer is they wouldn’t. You’re full of it. Landlords want to maximize profit from their property and when demand is soaring above supply, adding units is the way to do that so they are organizing to overturn laws that prevent them from doing so. There is a reason the tickets to this event cost $100+. This isn’t a working class movement lol. You are either stupid yourself or you’ve got a lot of nerve to act like others are, which is to say you certainly act like a landlord.
  - prottog 4y ago
    > Landlords want to maximize profit from their property and when demand is soaring above supply, adding units is the way to do that You're saying that as supply catches up to the soaring demand, profits will go up instead of down? There's a lot of name-calling in your post and not a lot of sense.
    - bombcar 4y ago
      NIMBY in the streets and YIMBY in the sheets I guess. If I owned a block of single family houses in Frisco I’d want to be able to turn my block to a giant apartment complex at the same time I’d want to prevent anyone else doing a similar thing. Then my profit goes up and isn’t endangered.
      - nopenopenopeno 4y ago
        Precisely.
    - deathanatos 4y ago
      > You're saying that as supply catches up to the soaring demand, profits will go up instead of down? I don't think you're wrong on the larger point that landlords are more likely to be on the side of NIMBYism / NIMBYs are going to be land owners. But, to an extent this is possible; the price would drop for the additional supply, but the total of (now_higher_supply * now_lower_price) can still be greater than (original_lower_supply * original_higher_price). Depends on how the market demand responds to the additional supply, and how much additional supply there is. (It can happen the other way, too, where the drop in price outweighs the new profit from the new supply, and total profit drops.) … so it kinda requires an idea of how the additional supply would cause the price to change, beyond what I suspect most landlords have. And a foresight/long-termism that I also don't think exists. And if you're a small time landlord not planning on building additional properties, then your supply is always 1, and if the price does down, obviously then too the product does. And I think in SF, the additional supply that is needed, from a more moral standpoint of "people need to live, commuting is bad for the environment and people's health", is crap tons of additional housing. The price to rent could halve and still be too high.
      - nopenopenopeno 4y ago
        Right. It doesn’t matter if landlords collectively profit because their behaviors are guided by their individual interests, not all the landlords of SF as one. In other words, different landlords with different plans, assets, and resources will act differently. Even if the collective landlords of SF did somehow lose profit from NIMBYism’s rise, some of them will stand to gain a lot and I’d bet on landlords at this NIMBY Prom event standing to gain a lot.
justinc-md 4y ago
Why would landlords want to drive down the price of housing?
- nopenopenopeno 4y ago
  Landlords care about profit, not price.
dannyobrien 4y ago
I think you're in a relatively small demographic that has even heard of YIMBY, and mainly heard of it through a small contingent of leftist critiques (and also has a negative view of landlords). Even in SF, that's not really the group whose mind the movement is intending to change. That's the group whose dominant historical grip on the left they're determined to dislodge, because of its harmful effect on San Francisco's progressive program.
- nopenopenopeno 4y ago
  So who are these people? The politicians are absolutely landlord-adjacent (i.e. NIMBY adjacent) if not landlords themselves, but who are the others? Just some desperate wage earners eager to dispose of their latest $100+ of income on this cheesy fundraiser? Give me a break!
  - dannyobrien 4y ago
    I'm a bit confused by you using NIMBY and YIMBY interchangeably here, but most of the YIMBY activists I know come from people who got into housing policy because they couldn't afford to live in SF. They're all renters, and most come from a lefty political background. Fundraising events are pretty common in this kind of environment: if it was landlord driven, i'd imagine the tickets would be more in the thousands, as that's common for traditional for party political fundraisers in US cities, where you are paying for access. I'd compare it to, say, the Harvey Milk Club Gayla, whose prices you can see here: https://www.milkclub.org/gayla https://www.milkclub.org/gayla
api 4y ago
If supply isn't increased but demand is increased, the price goes up. San Francisco is a popular city with a strong job market (demand) and won't build housing, so the price goes up. What part of that is hard for people to understand?
- prottog 4y ago
  The part that's hard for people to understand is not the basic supply and demand issue, but rather why well-intentioned, good-sounding policies like environmental review processes, rent control, or mandatory affordable housing quotas don't accomplish what they say they would; to understand the latter requires an understanding of the higher-order repercussions of those policies.

That makes no sense. Landlords tend to be opposed to YIMBY's, because allowing for more housing makes for a more competitive housing market, rather than one in which landowners dominate.

nopenopenopeno 4y ago
Why would landlords in the market with the highest demand prioritize fending off competition? The answer is they wouldn’t. You’re full of it. Landlords want to maximize profit from their property and when demand is soaring above supply, adding units is the way to do that so they are organizing to overturn laws that prevent them from doing so. There is a reason the tickets to this event cost $100+. This isn’t a working class movement lol. You are either stupid yourself or you’ve got a lot of nerve to act like others are, which is to say you certainly act like a landlord.
- prottog 4y ago
  > Landlords want to maximize profit from their property and when demand is soaring above supply, adding units is the way to do that You're saying that as supply catches up to the soaring demand, profits will go up instead of down? There's a lot of name-calling in your post and not a lot of sense.
  - bombcar 4y ago
    NIMBY in the streets and YIMBY in the sheets I guess. If I owned a block of single family houses in Frisco I’d want to be able to turn my block to a giant apartment complex at the same time I’d want to prevent anyone else doing a similar thing. Then my profit goes up and isn’t endangered.
    - nopenopenopeno 4y ago
      Precisely.
  - deathanatos 4y ago
    > You're saying that as supply catches up to the soaring demand, profits will go up instead of down? I don't think you're wrong on the larger point that landlords are more likely to be on the side of NIMBYism / NIMBYs are going to be land owners. But, to an extent this is possible; the price would drop for the additional supply, but the total of (now_higher_supply * now_lower_price) can still be greater than (original_lower_supply * original_higher_price). Depends on how the market demand responds to the additional supply, and how much additional supply there is. (It can happen the other way, too, where the drop in price outweighs the new profit from the new supply, and total profit drops.) … so it kinda requires an idea of how the additional supply would cause the price to change, beyond what I suspect most landlords have. And a foresight/long-termism that I also don't think exists. And if you're a small time landlord not planning on building additional properties, then your supply is always 1, and if the price does down, obviously then too the product does. And I think in SF, the additional supply that is needed, from a more moral standpoint of "people need to live, commuting is bad for the environment and people's health", is crap tons of additional housing. The price to rent could halve and still be too high.
    - nopenopenopeno 4y ago
      Right. It doesn’t matter if landlords collectively profit because their behaviors are guided by their individual interests, not all the landlords of SF as one. In other words, different landlords with different plans, assets, and resources will act differently. Even if the collective landlords of SF did somehow lose profit from NIMBYism’s rise, some of them will stand to gain a lot and I’d bet on landlords at this NIMBY Prom event standing to gain a lot.

justinc-md 4y ago

Why would landlords want to drive down the price of housing?

nopenopenopeno 4y ago
Landlords care about profit, not price.

dannyobrien 4y ago

I think you're in a relatively small demographic that has even heard of YIMBY, and mainly heard of it through a small contingent of leftist critiques (and also has a negative view of landlords). Even in SF, that's not really the group whose mind the movement is intending to change. That's the group whose dominant historical grip on the left they're determined to dislodge, because of its harmful effect on San Francisco's progressive program.

nopenopenopeno 4y ago
So who are these people? The politicians are absolutely landlord-adjacent (i.e. NIMBY adjacent) if not landlords themselves, but who are the others? Just some desperate wage earners eager to dispose of their latest $100+ of income on this cheesy fundraiser? Give me a break!
- dannyobrien 4y ago
  I'm a bit confused by you using NIMBY and YIMBY interchangeably here, but most of the YIMBY activists I know come from people who got into housing policy because they couldn't afford to live in SF. They're all renters, and most come from a lefty political background. Fundraising events are pretty common in this kind of environment: if it was landlord driven, i'd imagine the tickets would be more in the thousands, as that's common for traditional for party political fundraisers in US cities, where you are paying for access. I'd compare it to, say, the Harvey Milk Club Gayla, whose prices you can see here: https://www.milkclub.org/gayla https://www.milkclub.org/gayla

api 4y ago

If supply isn't increased but demand is increased, the price goes up. San Francisco is a popular city with a strong job market (demand) and won't build housing, so the price goes up. What part of that is hard for people to understand?

prottog 4y ago
The part that's hard for people to understand is not the basic supply and demand issue, but rather why well-intentioned, good-sounding policies like environmental review processes, rent control, or mandatory affordable housing quotas don't accomplish what they say they would; to understand the latter requires an understanding of the higher-order repercussions of those policies.