3 ms·
There is nothing wrong with expressing one's concerns. Problems arise when governments allow the concerns of NIMBYs to override the greater social good, allow N
by II2II 2y ago
There is nothing wrong with expressing one's concerns. Problems arise when governments allow the concerns of NIMBYs to override the greater social good, allow NIMBYs to stall the decision making process, or fail to cerify the legitimacy of the claims being made.
In a case like this, yes it is NIMBYism. On the other hand, having high frequency flights over an existing residential are, for the primary benefit of one party (i.e. Amazon) would seem to support the groundings.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> In a case like this, yes it is NIMBYism College Station’s residents appear to fail your own test. They are prohibited by Texas law from being “allow[ed]…to override” or stall anything, and seem to have made a good case for why a drone buzzing by “every 58 seconds for 15 hours a day” is at least a legitimate grievance. I’d also add a necessary condition to NIMBYism: it’s not in my backyard. NIMBYs want the thing. Just not near them; implicitly: near someone else. The hypocrisy animates the exasperation inherent to the term. The complaints in this article seem to be closer to not in anyone’s backyard.
- brummm 2y agoI don't think this is NIMBYism. The complaints are kind of reasonable and also, allowing a private company like Amazon do this most certainly is not something for the greater good. It's just good for Amazon.