Earlier quoted context omitted.
Too bad most of them are probably immigrants with no voting rights.
If it sucks here then don't move here?
There is no perfect place. Pick what you are willing to accept.
Bills before the California Legislature would crack down on NIMBYs
291–300 of 329 posts
Re: Bills before the California Legislature would crack down on NIMBYs
#292Re: Bills before the California Legislature would crack down on NIMBYs
#293Earlier quoted context omitted.
Again, why shouldn't the be allowed to do that? I want to live on Harvard/MITs campus and live next to the smartest people in the world (at least some of them) and have a nice little 3 br house on a half acre. These high home prices keep me out it's not fair!! This simply cannot work. The most desirable areas in the world are going to have high prices that exclude "normal people" period. > Houses are for sale, of cou…
If everyone adopted this attitude, there'd be nowhere to live. All of the reasons you enumerate are people wanting to live in an area that makes it valuable for them; I think there's a fair number of people in the Bay Area that don't really care to live here particularly , but this is where the tech industry has decided to concentrate a ridiculous amount of its jobs. Job markets in other metropolises like Boston are…
Sure but you're framing it as if you somehow don't have a choice and how dare other people who have live there now want to protect their communities and lifestyles.
I've lived all over the world. Moving sucks. But life is what it is. If I wasn't making the money I am now where I live and it was too expensive then I would just leave. You don't have to work for Google or Facebook or whatever. You can go have a huge impact at a smaller company that really needs the talent somewhere else in the country. If Google can't find good people because rent is too high and they aren't raising wages, don't be an idiot and move there and just get paid shit and then complain about it. Move to Michigan and work in automotive, or move to Nashville and work doing something there. Don't act like you don't have choices. You do.
Re: Bills before the California Legislature would crack down on NIMBYs
#294Earlier quoted context omitted.
K so I'll buy the houses surrounding yours and build some huge barbwire walls, then on the outside of the walls I'll just paint them with horrific images, just gross stuff that anybody would find disgusting to look at. You spent 1.5mm on that house, and now because it's surrounded with these walls the property value is cut to basically nothing. House appraised as worthless, financial ruin for you. But hey fuck you ri…
You're asserting an entitlement to control property you which is literally titled to not-you. You don't get to call other people entitled. Good day.
lol I do and will continue to cal people entitled when they act as if they are the only ones entitled to anything. Maybe since none of you are property owners you don't understand. Idk. Neighborhoods form and get to do things like create zoning laws and regulations. Don't like? Don't move there. Period.
Re: Bills before the California Legislature would crack down on NIMBYs
#295Earlier quoted context omitted.
K so I'll buy the houses surrounding yours and build some huge barbwire walls, then on the outside of the walls I'll just paint them with horrific images, just gross stuff that anybody would find disgusting to look at. You spent 1.5mm on that house, and now because it's surrounded with these walls the property value is cut to basically nothing. House appraised as worthless, financial ruin for you. But hey fuck you ri…
Neither views nor neighborhoods are considered to be property under real-estate law. Basically, no. Just no. Other people do get to spend their own money on property near yours and use it as they please. That's a free economy. If you don't like it, try some form of central planning. I think feudalism might really suit you.
Ha! I'm an anarchist.
But yes neighborhoods do get to control things like that and they should. Ever wonder why there are no skyscrapers in DC? Ever wonder why there are home owners associations that can dictate what colors and upkeep you do on your property? My example was extreme, but rules and controls exist for a reason. If you don't like it, then don't live there.
Re: Bills before the California Legislature would crack down on NIMBYs
#296Earlier quoted context omitted.
No different than any other prevention, or rule. Why shouldn't they be able to? If you moving to my community and doing whatever causes damage to the value of my property that's no different than doing damage to anything else. It's their community they set the rules. Why have communities or governments, or even countries for that matter? Fundamentally they do the same things. Why should I not be able to just come liv…
>It's their community they set the rules. Why have communities or governments, or even countries for that matter? Fundamentally they do the same things. Let's try changing this up. "It's my community, so I set the rules. We're seizing the means of production, and any bourgeois scum who don't want to give them up can be put against the wall and shot." Chances are you suddenly developed an objection. Maybe "we'll set t…
That's nonsense. Seizing property against somebody's will is an initiation of force and violence to deprive somebody of rightful ownership of property. That's far different than a home owners association or a neighborhood ordinance. Now you could go in and vote that ordinance out, but aside from that your analogy here is not good at all.
And towns do set rules all the time. People get together, vote in legislators, and set rules. For example, building height restriction. I don't understand what your problem is here.
Re: Bills before the California Legislature would crack down on NIMBYs
#297Earlier quoted context omitted.
This seems like the sort of behavior which can be disincentivized with steep fines. You, a developer, built a large building not to code? You have to pay to have it re-worked, and in addition you pay the local town $1000 per domicile affected per day it's delayed. Made-up example, but you get the idea.
Createdmall development company, take the contract, deliver faulty building, accept payment, pay out funds to employees (subcontractors) and owners of the company, shut down company if the district comes after them. It would incentivize his sort of behavior too.
Ensure that developers/owners may be held personally liable. There should be lots of ways to do this: bonds, insurance, promissory notes, collateral.
Re: Bills before the California Legislature would crack down on NIMBYs
#298IMO, it's gotten bad enough in the Bay Area that local control of zoning ought to get abolished. Make a new regional zoning commission, put together some clear and consistent rules about what can be built and where, and rubber-stamp everything that meets those rules. Literal rubber-stamp here, as in "you give us an affidavit saying that your plan meets the specified rules, and you get a permit to build the same day,…
I always find it interesting to hear what people believe they deserve. In these comments you can hear the "I deserve to live in a house with my family of 4 in Palo Alto". Do you really deserve that? Says who? That would be like me showing up in NYC and saying I deserve to live in a penthouse on 5th Ave. No I don't. There is plenty of wide open space outside the Bay Area.
And I "deserve" to commute for over an hour to my nice awesome office that's in San Francisco from some distant suburb, because - why? Why do I "deserve" such punishment? Because someone was born at the right time and place 70 years ago and could afford a place in San Fran working a blue collar job and now fuck everyone else, he got his? Why? Why sacrifice all future generations on the altar of some baby boomer's "retirement plan" (said property?)
I'm not aware of any country or city (besides London) that does this to young people. It's insane to be making over $100,000 anywhere in the world and be expected to pay $5000/month for a studio just because building some high-density housing would diminish some entrenched gentry's view of the ocean.
The NIMBY's can all go and shoot themselves in the face, as far as I'm concerned.
Re: Bills before the California Legislature would crack down on NIMBYs
#299Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since the value appreciates in land, condos do not tend to gain value over time. At best a condo will have the same value because of exhaustive maintenance.
That's not true at all. Condo prices rise just like single family homes. And when you own a condo, you own a fraction of the land it sits on . I would agree that condos tend to be more volatile than single family homes. More of them can be built quickly and when real estate prices start to drop it often starts with the condos.
Seems to be regional. I'm sure condos in places like DC appreciate, but in my region, condos absolutely seem to depreciate on average. It's exceedingly rare for me to find a condo on Zillow asking more than it was sold for 5+ years ago.
Re: Bills before the California Legislature would crack down on NIMBYs
#300Right now cities have all the incentive to create office space to bring in as many jobs as possible, and the taxes that come with them, while leaving housing and infrastructure as someone else's problem. There needs to be an incentive in place for this not to happen. Perhaps we need to force the municipalities to split their employment tax with the city where the employee actually lives? Admittedly I have no idea wha…
Abolish local income taxes? Perhaps replace the income with state funds that are distributed based on population.