111–120 of 187 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you're saying that because my neighbor has much more money than I he can behave however he pleases even if the whole neighborhood despises him?
It isn't illegal to be hated, at least not yet. You seem awfully eager to coerce your neighbors into behaving in a way consistent with your personal values.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of the problems in Berlin is that dense residential areas cluster at the edges of the town and office space tends to cluster at the center. So now, if you want to have an office in Berlin and are a company that has more than a handful of employees, people will come from all sides of town, so you'd preferably want office space in the center - which gradually eats up all space that could have been used for housing…
Berlin has a center? Last time I checked (Sunday), it was still more like an eye of the storm kind of void. But that's perfectly consistent with your finer point, if you could somehow restrict your employees to roughly one quadrant, many things would be much easier. That will never happen of course.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure enough adding more housing when there is speculation works as we’ve seen in Vancouver.
According to this, average 1br rent in Vancouver is only $1500/month, which seems pretty reasonable to me for a major city, especially one that's seen as very desirable like Vancouver: https://www.rentjungle.com/average-rent-in-vancouver-bc-rent... If we could get SF down to 1500/month I'd be ecstatic, that's less than half the current price.
The whole protesting thing seems pretty tame these days. They list demands, but don't follow up with any threat? Why would anyone take the demands seriously?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They could try working with local governments to get more housing built. They already are involved in politics on matters like net neutrality and immigration. They can clearly pay for more lobbyists and lawyers.
I’m not sure about the sitch in Berlin, but here in the SF Bsy Area they do try to push for policies and development, they are seldom successful. They get lots of pushback.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't think you quite grasp the effects of a massive influx of hundreds to thousands of new individuals making $150k-250k. I'm from the bay area and pay close attention to land use/zoning issues, so yeah, I think I do. The bay area has had particularly extreme series of decades of rent increases precisely because of anti-housing policies. If the market was allowed to respond, rents would still rise, to be sure, b…
> Companies have a basic duty to run themselves ethically and obey laws and regulations. Externalities exist. Companies cannot pretend they operate independently of the communities they're based in. They also can't shut their ears. Even if local zoning laws are at fault, these companies which spend lavishly on lobbyists at the national and provincial level, don't seem to be agitating for local change to improve housi…
True enough, higher wages cause prices of goods and services to rise. But again, the externality in this case is a result of workers having more money: exactly what everyone in the country, right and left, wants to see. That's why getting upset at them for that is silly.
It's like getting upset at green energy companies for making coal miners obsolete by getting cheaper and more productive. Yeah, that's an externality, and it sucks for those miners. But ultimately, that's still what society wants to have happen.
> Even if local zoning laws are at fault, these companies which spend lavishly on lobbyists at the national and provincial level, don't seem to be agitating for local change to improve housing conditions, which would better both their employees' quality of life and their own public perception.
No, they absolutely do. For example, Google is in frequent contact with the Mountain View city council over land use, for example, and has been supportive of adding housing to the north bayshore area where their HQ is.
However, many residents, especially long-term residents, are skeptical or critical of big tech companies, so they can only throw their weight around so much. Putting too much pressure on local cities would just cause a political backlash. Yes, Google is rich, but ultimately residents voting is what brings about regulatory changes. Contrary to what many Americans seem to think, companies can't just directly buy new laws.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honest question: where would you prefer to put those thousands of individuals making $150-250k? I mean, they have to work somewhere, right? And they want to live in big, vibrant metropolitain areas for the same reason that YOU want to live in those areas (which is why you're upset about the rent in the first place). Is there really a solution in your head where high-paid geeks are going to move to Boise or Zagreb or…
Sometimes there aren’t good answers. Prosperity for some displaces. You can’t be surprised that those who aren’t rich, and we’re already here, are angry at the situation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or conversely, look at Portland for an example a place where keeping up with housing demand has not translated into preserving a quantity of affordable housing. Abstracted supply and demand alone does not result in ensuring housing at various price points
Or Vancouver. Singapore and Vienna is really a counter argument more than anything else. These are places were the government have significant control over, and are essentially undermining, the housing market. This isn't changing zoning a little bit. In Singapore the government acquired most of the land. And Austria is spending the equivalent of a defense budget each year on housing subsidies alone.
> This isn't changing zoning a little bit.
It's true, fairly radical zoning changes are warranted. Or at least, radical by US standards. Although you probably wouldn't have to go quite as far as Singapore, since obviously US cities aren't as land restricted.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Companies have a basic duty to run themselves ethically and obey laws and regulations. Externalities exist. Companies cannot pretend they operate independently of the communities they're based in. They also can't shut their ears. Even if local zoning laws are at fault, these companies which spend lavishly on lobbyists at the national and provincial level, don't seem to be agitating for local change to improve housi…
> Externalities exist. Companies cannot pretend they operate independently of the communities they're based in. True enough, higher wages cause prices of goods and services to rise. But again, the externality in this case is a result of workers having more money: exactly what everyone in the country, right and left, wants to see. That's why getting upset at them for that is silly. It's like getting upset at green ene…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honest question: where would you prefer to put those thousands of individuals making $150-250k? I mean, they have to work somewhere, right? And they want to live in big, vibrant metropolitain areas for the same reason that YOU want to live in those areas (which is why you're upset about the rent in the first place). Is there really a solution in your head where high-paid geeks are going to move to Boise or Zagreb or…
Many Californians have been moving to Boise.