6 ms·

For every other non-native speaker like me, lmgtfu: NIMBY (/ˈnɪmbi/, or nimby), an acronym for the phrase "not in my back yard", is a characterization of opposi

For every other non-native speaker like me, lmgtfu: NIMBY (/ˈnɪmbi/, or nimby), an acronym for the phrase "not in my back yard", is a characterization of opposition by residents to proposed infrastructure developments in their local area, as well as support for strict land use regulations.

crazypyro 3y ago
In simple terms, people want airports, but nobody wants an airport near their house.
- anonzzzies 3y ago
  And the state really shouldn’t care about these few. Probably rich enough to move but don’t want because blah blah.
  - arrowsmith 3y ago
    "Few"? Almost no-one wants to live next door to an airport.
    - codeulike 3y ago
      I think they meant: For any given site, theres proportionally 'few' people that would be disadvantaged
      - anonzzzies 3y ago
        Yep. You cannot just put them just anywhere, so if a location has been found and some people don’t like it, well, that happens. Like others said; everyone wants to fly but they don’t want the bad side. Fine but it happens.
    - egeozcan 3y ago
      But almost everybody wants access to one. This is coming from someone who lived a a kilometer away from the main airport of Istanbul at the time[0], for a long time. I was really disappointed when it was closed as the benefit of access was 100x better than the noise cost. Of course, everybody has different priorities and getting a huge noise source in your backyard after you decide to call a piece of land your home would be frustrating. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atat%C3%BCrk_Airport https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atat%C3%BCrk_Airport - used to be a very busy airport.
      - ghaff 3y ago
        Eh. As someone who used to travel a lot living 50 miles from the airport was a bit of an inconvenience but certainly one I could live with. Just took a bit longer to get to the airport. I wouldn't have wanted to live next to it.
        arrowsmith 3y ago
        Yeah me too, I live an hour's drive from my nearest airport and that's more than close enough - mainly because that airport is London Heathrow, meaning I can catch a flight to basically anywhere in the world from it. Living close to a small, poorly-connected airport would be far less convenient than living further away from a major airport.
    - jojobas 3y ago
      If this was true, areas around airports would have been non-residential or at least stupidly penalized in land value. They don't seem to be. In fact when you live close to an airport you stop caring, perhaps not unlike smoke alarm chirps but without danger to your life.
    - theultdev 3y ago
      The people who work at them do.
- rob74 3y ago
  ...same as with major roads, train lines, power lines, power plants (including but not limited to nuclear and wind), affordable (i.e. high density) housing etc. etc.
  - Symbiote 3y ago
    Not all of that. Railways are relatively quiet and very useful, someone living near one will might well use it very frequently.
    - monknomo 3y ago
      I have lived near a freight railway, and I assure you they are not quiet
      - Symbiote 3y ago
        I lived near several 80%-passenger railways in England, and they are not silent but they are quieter and less annoying than roads. Most of the trains were electric, including the freight trains.
        monknomo 3y ago
        US experience is different, with big diesels and primarily freight. I'd rate them as similarly annoying to a divided highway, but I suppose it depends on the region and the specifics
        Symbiote 3y ago
        There are a million train spotter videos on YouTube, and given the audience I'm unlikely to find one filmed in someone's back garden. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-wyR316550 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-wyR316550 (The navy blue trains with yellow 'noses' are high-speed commuter trains, the dark blue, gold and white ones are the high-speed trains to France, the plain white ones are normal-speed commuter trains to London.) I think the continuously welded rails are the biggest improvement, as they remove most of the "clackety-clack". Instead you get the "hiss", but that's only noticeable from really close.
- jojobas 3y ago
  People buy homes near existing airports with very small discounts for the inconvenience.
codeulike 3y ago
what does lmgtfu mean?
- magnio 3y ago
  For every other non-native speaker like me, ttbomk: lmgtfu, let me Google that for you.
  - codeulike 3y ago
    Can you do an eli5 of what ttbomk means?
    - AnimalMuppet 3y ago
      "To The Best Of My Knowledge". (I had to Google it, too.) Or was that an ironic reply?
      - polycaster 3y ago
        afaict that was serious
- richardwhiuk 3y ago
  Let Me Google That For U (usually LMGTFY)
bradley13 3y ago
Your definition is accurate, but I think it is incomplete. The stereotypical NIMBY doesn't want something in their backyard, but they still want the advantages of it existing. They want it to be place in someone else's backyard. People opposing airport construction still want to fly. They just want someone else to have the noise.
- Gare 3y ago
  > People opposing airport construction still want to fly. Maybe they do in America. But in Europe there's not much need/want of frequent flying for the average citizen.
  - bradley13 3y ago
    In 2022 (according to Statista) there were around 500 million passenger-flights, compared to the 800 million in the US. Accounting for population differences, that means that Europeans fly around half as often as USAians. Yes, that is less, but it is still a lot.
- floxy 3y ago
  >People opposing airport construction still want to fly. In this age of big data, is there a way to quantify this? My gut feeling is that this is a very heavily Pareto-like distribution, with maybe say 5% of the population accounting for 90% of the passenger miles or flight segments. With the majority of the people flying a handful of times (or less) in their life. And even then, "want" is probably a strong qualifier, since I'd also think the majority of the flight miles are for business travel. You may "want" to keep your job, so you have to fly sometimes. If we had to drastically curtail flying in the future, I'm guessing that not too many people are going to regret missing out on the business meetings to Detroit in January, compared to say, vacations in Florida.
deathanatos 3y ago
> as well as support for strict land use regulations. Perhaps superficially, but no, not necessarily. A large part of the NIMBYism seen in places like SF is opposition to projects that do conform to land use regulation. The entire "by-right" movement is that, if the proposed project is legal (it meets zoning, codes, etc.), then it should be permitted to build. NIMBYs opposed that. YIMBYs mostly aren't opposed to land use regulations, either. (Wanting to change the zoning of an area, or changes the specifics of the regulations is not "against land use regulations", or treating them any less strictly.)

crazypyro 3y ago

In simple terms, people want airports, but nobody wants an airport near their house.

anonzzzies 3y ago
And the state really shouldn’t care about these few. Probably rich enough to move but don’t want because blah blah.
- arrowsmith 3y ago
  "Few"? Almost no-one wants to live next door to an airport.
  - codeulike 3y ago
    I think they meant: For any given site, theres proportionally 'few' people that would be disadvantaged
    - anonzzzies 3y ago
      Yep. You cannot just put them just anywhere, so if a location has been found and some people don’t like it, well, that happens. Like others said; everyone wants to fly but they don’t want the bad side. Fine but it happens.
  - egeozcan 3y ago
    But almost everybody wants access to one. This is coming from someone who lived a a kilometer away from the main airport of Istanbul at the time[0], for a long time. I was really disappointed when it was closed as the benefit of access was 100x better than the noise cost. Of course, everybody has different priorities and getting a huge noise source in your backyard after you decide to call a piece of land your home would be frustrating. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atat%C3%BCrk_Airport https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atat%C3%BCrk_Airport - used to be a very busy airport.
    - ghaff 3y ago
      Eh. As someone who used to travel a lot living 50 miles from the airport was a bit of an inconvenience but certainly one I could live with. Just took a bit longer to get to the airport. I wouldn't have wanted to live next to it.
      - arrowsmith 3y ago
        Yeah me too, I live an hour's drive from my nearest airport and that's more than close enough - mainly because that airport is London Heathrow, meaning I can catch a flight to basically anywhere in the world from it. Living close to a small, poorly-connected airport would be far less convenient than living further away from a major airport.
  - jojobas 3y ago
    If this was true, areas around airports would have been non-residential or at least stupidly penalized in land value. They don't seem to be. In fact when you live close to an airport you stop caring, perhaps not unlike smoke alarm chirps but without danger to your life.
  - theultdev 3y ago
    The people who work at them do.
rob74 3y ago
...same as with major roads, train lines, power lines, power plants (including but not limited to nuclear and wind), affordable (i.e. high density) housing etc. etc.
- Symbiote 3y ago
  Not all of that. Railways are relatively quiet and very useful, someone living near one will might well use it very frequently.
  - monknomo 3y ago
    I have lived near a freight railway, and I assure you they are not quiet
    - Symbiote 3y ago
      I lived near several 80%-passenger railways in England, and they are not silent but they are quieter and less annoying than roads. Most of the trains were electric, including the freight trains.
      - monknomo 3y ago
        US experience is different, with big diesels and primarily freight. I'd rate them as similarly annoying to a divided highway, but I suppose it depends on the region and the specifics
        Symbiote 3y ago
        There are a million train spotter videos on YouTube, and given the audience I'm unlikely to find one filmed in someone's back garden. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-wyR316550 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-wyR316550 (The navy blue trains with yellow 'noses' are high-speed commuter trains, the dark blue, gold and white ones are the high-speed trains to France, the plain white ones are normal-speed commuter trains to London.) I think the continuously welded rails are the biggest improvement, as they remove most of the "clackety-clack". Instead you get the "hiss", but that's only noticeable from really close.
jojobas 3y ago
People buy homes near existing airports with very small discounts for the inconvenience.

codeulike 3y ago

what does lmgtfu mean?

magnio 3y ago
For every other non-native speaker like me, ttbomk: lmgtfu, let me Google that for you.
- codeulike 3y ago
  Can you do an eli5 of what ttbomk means?
  - AnimalMuppet 3y ago
    "To The Best Of My Knowledge". (I had to Google it, too.) Or was that an ironic reply?
    - polycaster 3y ago
      afaict that was serious
richardwhiuk 3y ago
Let Me Google That For U (usually LMGTFY)

bradley13 3y ago

Your definition is accurate, but I think it is incomplete. The stereotypical NIMBY doesn't want something in their backyard, but they still want the advantages of it existing. They want it to be place in someone else's backyard. People opposing airport construction still want to fly. They just want someone else to have the noise.

Gare 3y ago
> People opposing airport construction still want to fly. Maybe they do in America. But in Europe there's not much need/want of frequent flying for the average citizen.
- bradley13 3y ago
  In 2022 (according to Statista) there were around 500 million passenger-flights, compared to the 800 million in the US. Accounting for population differences, that means that Europeans fly around half as often as USAians. Yes, that is less, but it is still a lot.
floxy 3y ago
>People opposing airport construction still want to fly. In this age of big data, is there a way to quantify this? My gut feeling is that this is a very heavily Pareto-like distribution, with maybe say 5% of the population accounting for 90% of the passenger miles or flight segments. With the majority of the people flying a handful of times (or less) in their life. And even then, "want" is probably a strong qualifier, since I'd also think the majority of the flight miles are for business travel. You may "want" to keep your job, so you have to fly sometimes. If we had to drastically curtail flying in the future, I'm guessing that not too many people are going to regret missing out on the business meetings to Detroit in January, compared to say, vacations in Florida.

deathanatos 3y ago

> as well as support for strict land use regulations. Perhaps superficially, but no, not necessarily. A large part of the NIMBYism seen in places like SF is opposition to projects that do conform to land use regulation. The entire "by-right" movement is that, if the proposed project is legal (it meets zoning, codes, etc.), then it should be permitted to build. NIMBYs opposed that. YIMBYs mostly aren't opposed to land use regulations, either. (Wanting to change the zoning of an area, or changes the specifics of the regulations is not "against land use regulations", or treating them any less strictly.)