7 ms·

Yes please! From your comment (maybe not intentionally?) this sounds like a bad thing. But for inhabitants being able to have stricter rules is a blessing. Ide

Yes please! From your comment (maybe not intentionally?) this sounds like a bad thing. But for inhabitants being able to have stricter rules is a blessing. Ideally that would work like with the countries: different cities have dramatically different sets of rules and compete for citizens. Private ownership allows for much more flexibility here.

consp 3y ago
And you also don't pay into the general issues in the country which are shoved off to the less fortunate home owners.
- vernon99 3y ago
  Leas fortunate in what? We don’t even know housing prices there yet. It could be dirt cheap since they bought the land very cheaply, instead of having a stack of landlords from multiple generations taking their cut in price increase as in a usual city. Such cities have a chance of actually being affordable - at least initially. And the more we have them, the more competition will that create and more affordable they will be. How is it different from buying a permanent license to a software product - but the one you can also sell and buy a new one!
houseatrielah 3y ago
It's got pros and cons. Most people vacation in walkable areas with vibrant street life like buskers, musicians and so forth. You can't just take your saxophone and setup shop in the mall or do any sort of political/community-oriented activity. That's what you lose. The upside, of course, is no heroin needles, tent cities, etc.
- vernon99 3y ago
  Why do you think you cannot have the good without the bad? What stops this new city council from allocating designated musician pods on the streets, having artist in resident programs, etc? The group from the list don’t look stupid to me and these are some of the most obvious things. PS: HN is such a strange community. In one thread people complain about US cities and SF in particular crumbling due to government mismanagement. In another they think that a new city built by some of our own members will devolve into a dystopia and give it no praise. This is an amazing idea and they already have land! I wish them only the best and if they need any help, my email is in my bio :)
  - jjulius 3y ago
    >In another they think that a new city built by some of our own members will devolve into a dystopia and give it no praise. Because, as members of this community, we're typically up to speed with the history, thought processes, beliefs, actions, etc. of the people involved in these purchases, and it sounds like, based on that understanding, many people in here don't trust the goals, vision, and/or intentions of the people behind this. Just because one might think that "SF in particular [is] crumbling due to government mismanagement" doesn't mean they should blindly go, "Oh yay, an alternative!". Edit: I'd love to entertain ideas around how we can get cities to function differently but, I'm sorry, I don't want to hear what Marc Andreesen has to say on the subject.
  - houseatrielah 3y ago
    Because you have fewer rights on private property than in public places. That's the fundamental reason. You can have the good without the bad -- a walkable city with some law enforcement and a DA that prosecutes. I suspect a new development won't be dense/mixed-use enough for interesting street life.
  - anigbrowl 3y ago
    city council from allocating designated musician pods on the streets 'Sorry we don't like your new song, you have been designated a trespasser and fined $10,000, this decision is not subject to appeal or further inquiry.' A city run by SV elites will be just as well run as tech companies terms of service are famous for fair dealing and customer cooperation, ie not at all.
  - tmnvix 3y ago
    > Why do you think you cannot have the good without the bad? In theory I think you are right, but I can't recall the last time I saw a busker in a private space like a mall or airport. Maybe the incentive to encourage this is just never strong enough for the owners?
    - dragonwriter 3y ago
      If you are renting property to businesses for commercial purposes, why would you give, rent, or tolerate the occupation of that space by someone who is paying less per square foot in rent, unless they are consistently doing something that increases the rent you can get from your other customers?
- rayiner 3y ago
  What you want in a vacation destination is very different from what you want where you live. Also, I’ve never vacationed anywhere with street musicians. Where are you talking about?
  - houseatrielah 3y ago
    Paris, London, Rome, Athens, NYC... Maybe you're not a city person?
hkt 3y ago
Or we could do something crazy like respect democratic norms rather than descending into a plutocratic hellscape.
- inglor_cz 3y ago
  The US is a huge country, it has plenty of space for experiments. It is not as if those people are taking over an ancient city of million people and bending it to their whim. Quite to the contrary, taking part in this project is entirely voluntary.
- landemva 3y ago
  A neat thing about private property is you can be your own plutocrat and run it precisely how you desire. You can make a big paved area and open it up to car drifters, homeless, and lemonade stands. You can get it done exactly right. In fact, you can democratize it and let everybody who shows up have a vote about what they can do on your property.
- vernon99 3y ago
  Descending to a plutocratic hellscape (without dragging others and this project doesn’t) is a basic human right we all should respect please!
  - salawat 3y ago
    There is an equally strong case for the person on the other side for the behavior they are trying to exclude to do the same. Just stop sucking please, they say. Not saying they are right, just saying pleas in that manner are already falling on ears deafened to them.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

consp 3y ago

And you also don't pay into the general issues in the country which are shoved off to the less fortunate home owners.

vernon99 3y ago
Leas fortunate in what? We don’t even know housing prices there yet. It could be dirt cheap since they bought the land very cheaply, instead of having a stack of landlords from multiple generations taking their cut in price increase as in a usual city. Such cities have a chance of actually being affordable - at least initially. And the more we have them, the more competition will that create and more affordable they will be. How is it different from buying a permanent license to a software product - but the one you can also sell and buy a new one!

houseatrielah 3y ago

It's got pros and cons. Most people vacation in walkable areas with vibrant street life like buskers, musicians and so forth. You can't just take your saxophone and setup shop in the mall or do any sort of political/community-oriented activity. That's what you lose. The upside, of course, is no heroin needles, tent cities, etc.

vernon99 3y ago
Why do you think you cannot have the good without the bad? What stops this new city council from allocating designated musician pods on the streets, having artist in resident programs, etc? The group from the list don’t look stupid to me and these are some of the most obvious things. PS: HN is such a strange community. In one thread people complain about US cities and SF in particular crumbling due to government mismanagement. In another they think that a new city built by some of our own members will devolve into a dystopia and give it no praise. This is an amazing idea and they already have land! I wish them only the best and if they need any help, my email is in my bio :)
- jjulius 3y ago
  >In another they think that a new city built by some of our own members will devolve into a dystopia and give it no praise. Because, as members of this community, we're typically up to speed with the history, thought processes, beliefs, actions, etc. of the people involved in these purchases, and it sounds like, based on that understanding, many people in here don't trust the goals, vision, and/or intentions of the people behind this. Just because one might think that "SF in particular [is] crumbling due to government mismanagement" doesn't mean they should blindly go, "Oh yay, an alternative!". Edit: I'd love to entertain ideas around how we can get cities to function differently but, I'm sorry, I don't want to hear what Marc Andreesen has to say on the subject.
- houseatrielah 3y ago
  Because you have fewer rights on private property than in public places. That's the fundamental reason. You can have the good without the bad -- a walkable city with some law enforcement and a DA that prosecutes. I suspect a new development won't be dense/mixed-use enough for interesting street life.
- anigbrowl 3y ago
  city council from allocating designated musician pods on the streets 'Sorry we don't like your new song, you have been designated a trespasser and fined $10,000, this decision is not subject to appeal or further inquiry.' A city run by SV elites will be just as well run as tech companies terms of service are famous for fair dealing and customer cooperation, ie not at all.
- tmnvix 3y ago
  > Why do you think you cannot have the good without the bad? In theory I think you are right, but I can't recall the last time I saw a busker in a private space like a mall or airport. Maybe the incentive to encourage this is just never strong enough for the owners?
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    If you are renting property to businesses for commercial purposes, why would you give, rent, or tolerate the occupation of that space by someone who is paying less per square foot in rent, unless they are consistently doing something that increases the rent you can get from your other customers?
rayiner 3y ago
What you want in a vacation destination is very different from what you want where you live. Also, I’ve never vacationed anywhere with street musicians. Where are you talking about?
- houseatrielah 3y ago
  Paris, London, Rome, Athens, NYC... Maybe you're not a city person?

hkt 3y ago

Or we could do something crazy like respect democratic norms rather than descending into a plutocratic hellscape.

inglor_cz 3y ago
The US is a huge country, it has plenty of space for experiments. It is not as if those people are taking over an ancient city of million people and bending it to their whim. Quite to the contrary, taking part in this project is entirely voluntary.
landemva 3y ago
A neat thing about private property is you can be your own plutocrat and run it precisely how you desire. You can make a big paved area and open it up to car drifters, homeless, and lemonade stands. You can get it done exactly right. In fact, you can democratize it and let everybody who shows up have a vote about what they can do on your property.
vernon99 3y ago
Descending to a plutocratic hellscape (without dragging others and this project doesn’t) is a basic human right we all should respect please!
- salawat 3y ago
  There is an equally strong case for the person on the other side for the behavior they are trying to exclude to do the same. Just stop sucking please, they say. Not saying they are right, just saying pleas in that manner are already falling on ears deafened to them.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]