4 ms·

Most of the worst aspects of the San Francisco Bay Area long predate the tech industry boom. The NIMBYs that made housing a largely unaffordable luxury, and its

by fmajid 4y ago

Most of the worst aspects of the San Francisco Bay Area long predate the tech industry boom. The NIMBYs that made housing a largely unaffordable luxury, and its inevitable consequence of large-scale homelessness, are precisely the Boomer hippies who turned coat with Reagan and adopted the greed-is-good naked self-interest with a vengeance. They've got theirs, and they couldn't care less if you drop dead.

kodah 4y ago
Those NIMBYs largely call themselves Progressives now: https://reason.com/2022/08/11/are-san-franciscos-nimbys-finally-getting-their-comeuppance/ https://reason.com/2022/08/11/are-san-franciscos-nimbys-fina... There are some articles that call out the political affiliations more directly, but all of the elected officials they're talking about are Progressives. I'm curious how one goes from Reagan to US Progressive.
- zozbot234 4y ago
  Progressivism is a big tent. In the early 20th century it was associated with urban politics of a rather authoritarian streak which promoted things like eugenics and a rigidly segregated labor market, fearing the "unfair" competition of non-white workers.
- fmajid 4y ago
  There's the rhetoric and lip service, and then there is the actual pursuit of a nakedly self-serving agenda. Both can be done simultaneously, e.g. the trust-fund baby Dean Preston's successful efforts to block anything from being built in his district.
- Mouthfeel 4y ago
  [dead]
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- nonethewiser 4y ago
  They don't
- threadweaver34 4y ago
  > I'm curious how one goes from Reagan to US Progressive. The common conservative critique of progressives is progressives say "affirmative action, affordable housing, wealth redistribution are all great, unless it affects me."
treeman79 4y ago
Compare standard of living of free market capitalist counties with socialist / communist countries. There are very good reasons you let markets choose with minimal government interference. People are going to be greedy in either scenario. But one is government officials having power. The other is regular people.
- TheOtherHobbes 4y ago
  Have you ever experienced the standard of living in a Scandinavian country? High taxes, but it's much easier to start and run a business, there are numerous unicorns, housing is affordable, locales of all kinds tend to be more pleasant, especially in cities. And no one is bankrupted by health care.
  - zozbot234 4y ago
    Scandinavian countries are ranked among the most economically free (i.e. "capitalist"), despite the high taxes. This was not always the case either, it's just how the 1980s "neoliberal revolution" (which was hugely influential throughout the West and arguably the world at large, well beyond the most commonly mentioned UK and US) played out there.
    - analognoise 4y ago
      Dying because insulin is up 1000% in 40 years is the most free capitalism - not what Scandinavia has.
      - zozbot234 4y ago
        Weird then how no one ever dies of starvation because bread is up 1000%. What market would you think of as freer to entry by new upstarts, the one for bread or for insulin?
      - readthenotes1 4y ago
        Insulin is up that much because of regulations that prevent entry by other competitors
ROTMetro 4y ago
Yeah no. You have: 1. Population growth. I would say this is the largest factor to making housing unaffordable. Unless your claim is that all growth if from local boomers kids (hint: it isn't). 2. Geography. San Francisco is surrounded by quite a bit of water if you haven't noticed. The Bay Area is fenced in with hills. I would argue that geography creates as much of the problem as zoning laws (because if there was easy room to expand people wouldn't be pushing to cancel long term planning and zoning laws and just force through high density housing). But nice try trying to blame someone on the fact that you want something (to live in a certain area) and think it's fair to trample peoples property rights to get it, make them out to be villians and 'others' worthy of scorn, while ignoring the largest factors (population growth and geography).

by fmajid 4y ago

kodah 4y ago

Those NIMBYs largely call themselves Progressives now: https://reason.com/2022/08/11/are-san-franciscos-nimbys-finally-getting-their-comeuppance/ https://reason.com/2022/08/11/are-san-franciscos-nimbys-fina... There are some articles that call out the political affiliations more directly, but all of the elected officials they're talking about are Progressives. I'm curious how one goes from Reagan to US Progressive.

zozbot234 4y ago
Progressivism is a big tent. In the early 20th century it was associated with urban politics of a rather authoritarian streak which promoted things like eugenics and a rigidly segregated labor market, fearing the "unfair" competition of non-white workers.
fmajid 4y ago
There's the rhetoric and lip service, and then there is the actual pursuit of a nakedly self-serving agenda. Both can be done simultaneously, e.g. the trust-fund baby Dean Preston's successful efforts to block anything from being built in his district.
Mouthfeel 4y ago
[dead]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
nonethewiser 4y ago
They don't
threadweaver34 4y ago
> I'm curious how one goes from Reagan to US Progressive. The common conservative critique of progressives is progressives say "affirmative action, affordable housing, wealth redistribution are all great, unless it affects me."

treeman79 4y ago

Compare standard of living of free market capitalist counties with socialist / communist countries. There are very good reasons you let markets choose with minimal government interference. People are going to be greedy in either scenario. But one is government officials having power. The other is regular people.

TheOtherHobbes 4y ago
Have you ever experienced the standard of living in a Scandinavian country? High taxes, but it's much easier to start and run a business, there are numerous unicorns, housing is affordable, locales of all kinds tend to be more pleasant, especially in cities. And no one is bankrupted by health care.
- zozbot234 4y ago
  Scandinavian countries are ranked among the most economically free (i.e. "capitalist"), despite the high taxes. This was not always the case either, it's just how the 1980s "neoliberal revolution" (which was hugely influential throughout the West and arguably the world at large, well beyond the most commonly mentioned UK and US) played out there.
  - analognoise 4y ago
    Dying because insulin is up 1000% in 40 years is the most free capitalism - not what Scandinavia has.
    - zozbot234 4y ago
      Weird then how no one ever dies of starvation because bread is up 1000%. What market would you think of as freer to entry by new upstarts, the one for bread or for insulin?
    - readthenotes1 4y ago
      Insulin is up that much because of regulations that prevent entry by other competitors

ROTMetro 4y ago

Yeah no. You have: 1. Population growth. I would say this is the largest factor to making housing unaffordable. Unless your claim is that all growth if from local boomers kids (hint: it isn't). 2. Geography. San Francisco is surrounded by quite a bit of water if you haven't noticed. The Bay Area is fenced in with hills. I would argue that geography creates as much of the problem as zoning laws (because if there was easy room to expand people wouldn't be pushing to cancel long term planning and zoning laws and just force through high density housing). But nice try trying to blame someone on the fact that you want something (to live in a certain area) and think it's fair to trample peoples property rights to get it, make them out to be villians and 'others' worthy of scorn, while ignoring the largest factors (population growth and geography).