Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Death by gentrification: the killing that shamed San Francisco

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 318 posts

Re: Death by gentrification: the killing that shamed San Francisco

#241

Post by refurb »

raldi wrote: post #27
pc86 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why the opposition to the Ellis Act? If I own a home and want to sell it, I shouldn't be limited to selling it to someone who wants to be a landlord (a very small minority of people). And if I buy a home, I shouldn't be forced to rent it to someone. If you rent a home you do not own it and you should not have any claim to what happens to it beyond the end of your current lease.

By the Copenhagen Theory of Ethics ( https://blog.jaibot.com/the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-eth... ), once you rent an apartment to someone for a particular price, you have a moral obligation to continue doing that forever.

That sounds like a great way to ensure no one ever rents an apartment to anyone.

Re: Death by gentrification: the killing that shamed San Francisco

#242

Post by Jtsummers »

branchless wrote: post #147
seibelj wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No idea why you are being downvoted. Supply and demand, this is Economics 101. I have made the same arguments about SF and people downvote me too. The #1 way to decrease rent is to build more supply. If there was double the apartments in SF, the rent would not be as high.

Many European countries had big supply pre 2008 and prices continued to rise. China has huge oversupply and yet prices have risen. It's loose credit. It's the banks.

I'm not familiar with European real estate, but I have to ask: Where within these countries are prices rising? Is it universal or is it constrained to popular, low-unit count areas (like is generally the case in the US)?

Re: Death by gentrification: the killing that shamed San Francisco

#243

Post by whatok »

tryitnow wrote: post #239
tptacek wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a person Rebecca Solnit chose to single out, carefully juxtaposing reports of his (incredibly obnoxious) behavior against Nieto's shooting, to which, even by Solnit's account (read carefully), he was not a party . I don't want to get drinks with this character in Solnit's story, either. But I'm not sure we should applaud the tactic of summoning up and focusing outrage on people like this.

Nope. Sorry, Evan Snow's recklessness in not getting his dog under control resulted in a innocent person getting shot, and cops whose careers are probably ruined. Snow deserves a big chunk of blame here. It's simple folks: if you're not highly confident that your dog will behave itself For those of you who still harbor sympathy for Snow, do a Google search for people who have been mauled by out of control dogs. Now S…

I'm pretty sure that pointing a device that appeared to be a gun at a group of cops after ignoring their requests for him to put his hands up had a bit more of an impact than the dog in this case.

Re: Death by gentrification: the killing that shamed San Francisco

#244

Post by [deleted] »

refurb wrote: post #241
raldi wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By the Copenhagen Theory of Ethics ( https://blog.jaibot.com/the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-eth... ), once you rent an apartment to someone for a particular price, you have a moral obligation to continue doing that forever.

That sounds like a great way to ensure no one ever rents an apartment to anyone.

[deleted]

Re: Death by gentrification: the killing that shamed San Francisco

#245

Post by wbl »

williamcotton wrote: post #142
tptacek wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a person Rebecca Solnit chose to single out, carefully juxtaposing reports of his (incredibly obnoxious) behavior against Nieto's shooting, to which, even by Solnit's account (read carefully), he was not a party . I don't want to get drinks with this character in Solnit's story, either. But I'm not sure we should applaud the tactic of summoning up and focusing outrage on people like this.

I can tell you first hand that the neighborhood has been overrun by men like Evan Snow. Considering you live in Chicago and that Rebecca and I actually live in Bernal Heights I think we have a much better perspective on the situation. Where I come from you don't call the cops because you think you saw "a Mexican crazy man waving a gun around". If you see something, you leave, and you don't say anything to anyone. If…

No, people do get shot. 12 year old boys get shot by gangsters in broad daylight, and no one says who did it. People get smashed on the head with poles by roving teenagers. That the cops are just another gang sometimes doesn't mean they aren't necessary, or that Stop Snitchin' is anything but aiding and abetting murder.

Re: Death by gentrification: the killing that shamed San Francisco

#247

Post by thaw13579 »

fiatmoney wrote: post #202
thaw13579 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I'm sure there's plenty of self interest at play, it's important to remember that there were explicitly racist legal practices as well. A specific example is the practice of racially restricted covenants, which literally prevents a home from being sold to a someone who isn't white: http://www.bostonfairhousing.org/timeline/1920s1948-Restrict...

And which haven't been enforceable for ~70 years, where they existed in at all. Some stuff has happened since then.

And after that there was the FHA:

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/05/the-raci...

Yes, "stuff" continues to happen, for better or worse, but it's hard to believe that the state of housing is independent of bigotry given the evidence.

Re: Death by gentrification: the killing that shamed San Francisco

#248

Post by massemphasis »

tptacek wrote: post #113
navait wrote: post #103

> Evan Snow, a thirtysomething “user experience design professional”..., who had moved to the neighbourhood about six months earlier (and who has since departed for a more suburban environment) > Snow never seemed to recognise that his out-of-control dog was the aggressor: “So Luna was, I think, looking to move around the benches or behind me to run up happily to get a chip from Mr Nieto. Mr Nieto became further – wh…

This is a person Rebecca Solnit chose to single out, carefully juxtaposing reports of his (incredibly obnoxious) behavior against Nieto's shooting, to which, even by Solnit's account (read carefully), he was not a party . I don't want to get drinks with this character in Solnit's story, either. But I'm not sure we should applaud the tactic of summoning up and focusing outrage on people like this.

Wow, you techbros are everywhere. Way to watch out for your bro. /s

Re: Death by gentrification: the killing that shamed San Francisco

#249

Post by massemphasis »

navait wrote: post #103

> Evan Snow, a thirtysomething “user experience design professional”..., who had moved to the neighbourhood about six months earlier (and who has since departed for a more suburban environment) > Snow never seemed to recognise that his out-of-control dog was the aggressor: “So Luna was, I think, looking to move around the benches or behind me to run up happily to get a chip from Mr Nieto. Mr Nieto became further – wh…

San Francisco used to be an awesome place, then all those people moved in from some white-only places and it's pretty much gone down hill. It used to be an awesome, diverse place with strong and creative people... now look at it. It's so sterile and void of originality it is sickening in comparison to what it used to be.

Alot of those people imitate the culture and creativity from San Francisco's once diverse population until it's just become another vapid rendition of a once vibrant city.

Look at clowns like "Lil Dicky" for example that exemplify the notoriety of the idiocy that is confused for San Francisco culture.

The worst are the police from the MidWest and other racist places where they openly shoot minorities (Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, Latinos, etc...) then they are assigned to places like San Francisco, Seattle, Silicon Valley, Portland, etc... to gentrify the area. They have been working a lot with the white supremacist "techbros' that plague San Francisco, such that when altercations occur, the police will abuse the minority every time. They even laugh about it too. It's sickening.

Re: Death by gentrification: the killing that shamed San Francisco

#250

Post by zeveb »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #234
zeveb wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No-one else gets a choice. Only the white folks. That's not really fair. White flight was a result of mandatory school integration policies, which forced middle-class (i.e., by-and-large white) and lower-class (i.e., by-and-large black) children into the same schools; white folks didn't have a choice about that, nor did those who stayed a bit longer have a choice about the continued decline of their cities. Poor ci…

Really? White folks were forced to move away because their kids might go to school with black kids? Only in America...

> White folks were forced to move away because their kids might go to school with black kids?

It's really, really unfortunate that race is a proxy for class in America. It's a natural and IMHO good human tendency for folks to want to be around others of their own class; the problem is that in America race and class are so conflated that one gets this horrible self-reinforcing racist spiral, which is unfair to blacks and poisonous to whites. And race isn't even all that good of a proxy for class, but due to the aforementioned self-reinforcing racist hate spiral it has been extraordinarily difficult to eliminate.

Post reply on HN