3 ms·

People who live here, and I mean actually live here, not ones that just pop in for a few years and decide it needs to change. YIMBYism is very misguided in SF.

pcwalton 3y ago
I've lived in SF for years as a residential property owner, in the Bay Area for over a decade, and I say bring on the development. Views on this issue are not as one-sided as you think. (Also, the idea that you need to have lived here for some arbitrary tenure to vote on issues is gross.)
- bifrost 3y ago
  Its only gross if you think being a multi-generational stakeholder is wrong.
  - tqi 3y ago
    It's not wrong, but making it a requirement for one's opinion to be taken seriously is pretty gross. For one, it actively favors people with money, since they are the only ones who can afford to establish new multi-generation bonafides. Also, lest we forget, this city's not too distant past includes long periods of redlining and the displacement of Japanese American residents from the homes. In other words, it's nice that your family was able to make it work here, and I genuinely think that it is an important perspective to consider, but maybe keep in mind that just because others weren't / aren't as fortunate doesn't mean they shouldn't have an equal claim to shaping the city's future.
    - bifrost 3y ago
      Tenure is absolutely something that should be considered. A person transient to an area shouldn't be allowed to uproot generations of tradition. All of those past issues are gone as of 70-40 years ago, harping about them is orthogonal. I know plenty of people who're poor who've managed to stick it out as well, or they left for greener pastures and are happy with those choices. And as I've said elsewhere - building is fine, but this building is ridiculous.
      - tqi 3y ago
        For one, 70-40 years ago is 2 to 4 generations, so I do think it's still relevant to think about. Also that history shaped what SF became, so new people wanting make changes doesn't seem unreasonable. For another, the fact that some people are able to make it work doesn't change the fact that the policies you and your friends advocate for actively make it harder for people to "stick it out." Which is a convenient way to limit who gets a say in what this city becomes.

pcwalton 3y ago

I've lived in SF for years as a residential property owner, in the Bay Area for over a decade, and I say bring on the development. Views on this issue are not as one-sided as you think. (Also, the idea that you need to have lived here for some arbitrary tenure to vote on issues is gross.)

bifrost 3y ago
Its only gross if you think being a multi-generational stakeholder is wrong.
- tqi 3y ago
  It's not wrong, but making it a requirement for one's opinion to be taken seriously is pretty gross. For one, it actively favors people with money, since they are the only ones who can afford to establish new multi-generation bonafides. Also, lest we forget, this city's not too distant past includes long periods of redlining and the displacement of Japanese American residents from the homes. In other words, it's nice that your family was able to make it work here, and I genuinely think that it is an important perspective to consider, but maybe keep in mind that just because others weren't / aren't as fortunate doesn't mean they shouldn't have an equal claim to shaping the city's future.
  - bifrost 3y ago
    Tenure is absolutely something that should be considered. A person transient to an area shouldn't be allowed to uproot generations of tradition. All of those past issues are gone as of 70-40 years ago, harping about them is orthogonal. I know plenty of people who're poor who've managed to stick it out as well, or they left for greener pastures and are happy with those choices. And as I've said elsewhere - building is fine, but this building is ridiculous.
    - tqi 3y ago
      For one, 70-40 years ago is 2 to 4 generations, so I do think it's still relevant to think about. Also that history shaped what SF became, so new people wanting make changes doesn't seem unreasonable. For another, the fact that some people are able to make it work doesn't change the fact that the policies you and your friends advocate for actively make it harder for people to "stick it out." Which is a convenient way to limit who gets a say in what this city becomes.