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

Berlin Google Campus occupied

besetzen.noblogs.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 187 posts

Re: Berlin Google Campus occupied

#131

Post by 738472527784 »

dexen wrote: post #110
sdenton4 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of my favorite spots in Berlin is the Monsterkabinett. It's an underground dungeon full of giant animatronic creatures who dance and sing along with the industrial style music of their creators. It's also a fantastic example of what's possible when you don't have to worry about rent. The space is part of an old squat, still filled with artists who now get a steady flow of tourists to sell to. And some of the arti…

There is no difference in kind between two hungry IT students developing better web search, and several hungry artists developing awesome dungeon of animatronics. Either start off poor, but once they get major traction, the money starts rolling in. Of course, the web search scales faster, but that's about it. Point being, the artists' den would become expensive bohemian district of the city anyway, startups or not, a…

Are you saying any economically successful person is an artist, contributes to society and culture as art does?

Are you saying, some billions heavy foreign company should have the same "right" to influence a region as a local art collective has?

Because they are basically the same?

Are you serious?

Re: Berlin Google Campus occupied

#132

Post by Xylakant »

rlanday wrote: post #73
Killes wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Always in Berlin the knee jerk response to what is going on "We have to keep the rents down!" in response to housing crisis....never "We have to raise pays!" Pay situation for many jobs in Berlin and to some extent most of Germany is just abysmal, even in tech in many cases. If people here put half the energy in fighting for fairer remuneration for their work rather than whining about the raising rent and property pr…

You can't fit more people into the same amount of housing by raising everyone's pay. Either someone needs to start living with more roommates, or someone needs to get priced out and decide to leave.

If pay was more equal, at least opportunities to stay in your local area would be more equal. I don’t think it’s the price as an absolute that makes people angry, it’s the feeling of being unable to compete for a beloved space.

Re: Berlin Google Campus occupied

#133

Post by TulliusCicero »

sdenton4 wrote: post #127
TulliusCicero wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can call it NIMBYism, but for Kreuzberg it's really more about fighting gentrification and displacement, and preserving a city at the edge of society. There's a fundamental difference between fighting development in the mission and presidio... SF tried "fighting" gentrification by blocking development, and it just made the problem twice as bad. Look at the results: do they look good to you? Why would you want t…

"We must burn the village to save it." New housing tends to be higher rent; if you want to increase affordable housing stock, mowing down older, lower-rent buildings isn't the way to do it. (Especially in Berlin, where housing is often already far higher density than you see anywhere in the bay area.)

> New housing tends to be higher rent

Yes, much like new cars tend to be more expensive than old cars. Is this...surprising to anyone? That used things are generally cheaper than new things?

> if you want to increase affordable housing stock, mowing down older, lower-rent buildings isn't the way to do it.

It actually can be, at least if you're increasing the total housing stock: http://cityobservatory.org/urban-myth-busting-high-income2/

Granted, for Berlin perhaps not always the case, and I think policies to that effect, that push for redevelopment to mean more total housing, would be a good idea.

And again, please don't ignore SF as a cautionary tale. SF tried the whole "let's not knock down buildings" thing, as hard as they could, in the face of overwhelming demand. Now: did it work?

Re: Berlin Google Campus occupied

#134

Post by Apocryphon »

ajross wrote: post #117
azinman2 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There are good answers. But they're ones of housing policy and urban planning, not "#FuckOffGoogle", which serves literally no one.

Telling angry people that they're irrational and not entitled to their anger is not a good answer, either.

Re: Berlin Google Campus occupied

#135

Post by ada1981 »

This is a great line:

“The Google Campus is intended to be a magnet for annoying young entrepreneurs whose IT-sweatshops (“start-ups”) promise to deliver new ideas to Google’s company business.”

Re: Berlin Google Campus occupied

#136

Post by Xylakant »

hobofan wrote: post #128
Xylakant wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it’s here: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Umspannwerk+Kreuzberg+GmbH... The Betahaus is here, maybe 5 minutes by bike https://www.google.com/maps/place/Betahouse,+Prinzessinnenst...

That's the old betahaus location. They recently moved.

Ok, Right, I haven’t been following that. It’s still not at Betahaus since they didn’t move there, I’d know if they were our neighbors.

Re: Berlin Google Campus occupied

#137

Post by bonsai80 »

jklinger410 wrote: post #54
bonsai80 wrote: post #35

Insulting the people you want to join you seems line a poor way to get support: "...work-shy benefit scroungers, strike-hungry air traffic controllers, long-living pensioners, unruly refugees, and all other local pests from the neighborhood..."

A big whoosh for you, my friend. Or worse, an intentional bad-faith reading. Those are clearly terms of endearment. Meant to evoke anger that OTHERS call them that. Owning the words to take them back, as they say. Also, this is German. Go do a little cultural research next time before the lazy comment.

Ah, ok got it. Sorry for misspeaking.

Re: Berlin Google Campus occupied

#138

Post by Apocryphon »

guiomie wrote: post #77
titzer wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is more the fault of NIMBYs and supply&demand-denialists I don't think you quite grasp the effects of a massive influx of hundreds to thousands of new individuals making $150k-250k. It increases rent across the board, which impacts all the people in an area. Sure, it might create a few new jobs for baristas and shopkeepers, a few bartenders and waitresses. But ultimately it just leads to gentrification and pri…

Genuinely asking, what can big companies do? Lobby for laws to not pay people 150-250k?

Two cyberpunk ideas:

1. Build new communities entirely (see Night City)

2. No politically viable solutions to income inequality? Do it yourself! Implement your own local basic income program for non-employee residents. Would at least help with PR. Gives a new spin on the phrase corporate welfare.

Re: Berlin Google Campus occupied

#139

Post by TulliusCicero »

Xylakant wrote: post #132
rlanday wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't fit more people into the same amount of housing by raising everyone's pay. Either someone needs to start living with more roommates, or someone needs to get priced out and decide to leave.

If pay was more equal, at least opportunities to stay in your local area would be more equal. I don’t think it’s the price as an absolute that makes people angry, it’s the feeling of being unable to compete for a beloved space.

Things might be slightly better then, but if there's still X number of housing units, you're still only going to have Y number of people living there.

Giving people a more even chance at winning musical chairs is nice, but how about just making more chairs?

Re: Berlin Google Campus occupied

#140

Post by Apocryphon »

carapace wrote: post #126
TulliusCicero wrote: post #14

> New tech companies are driving the rents up in the area higher and higher. The endpoint of this process can be seen in San Francisco, which once must have been a halfway livable city. This is more the fault of NIMBYs and supply&demand-denialists who work hard to prevent new housing from going up. Yes, tech companies brought the demand because of good jobs, but last I checked, we wanted companies to offer high payin…

No, the data do not back that up: https://www.theurbanist.org/2016/05/27/rents-in-san-francisc... In order for new construction to materially affect rent rate we would have to build more housing faster than it has ever been done before, for decades to come. Leaving aside the question of whether it is desirable to convert SF into another Manhattan, we could actually do it: there are modern methods to build entire new…

Not to mention, earthquakes. All that tech in SF in Seattle, located at tectonic hotspots.
Post reply on HN