Oregon passed sweeping housing crisis laws • Hacker News Board

Re: Oregon passed sweeping housing crisis laws

#261

Post by tathougies » Sun, Jul 21, 2019, 5:32 PM UTC

Misdicorl wrote: post #162

tathougies wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dont think ive ever seen a fast car on a dense city street (difficult to go fast when theres gridlock) whereas speeds above 55 mph were common on the 'nice' suburban street I grew up on

The fatality rate spikes around 30mph. Most city traffic is definitely in that range (at least that I've experienced). > speeds above 55 mph were common on the 'nice' suburban street I grew up on Thats not a suburban street, thats a highway interconnecting the suburb. Non-driving connection within a suburb is certainly a huge problem.

I mean it was a street with on street parking, sidewalks, a school etc. I am unsure how you can make such a universal statement unless youve experienced literally every suburb in america.

In san Francisco, most city traffic is less than 30 mph because of high density

Re: Oregon passed sweeping housing crisis laws

#262

Post by devxvda » Sun, Jul 21, 2019, 6:16 PM UTC

dymk wrote: post #212

devxvda wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until they collude with each other.

Which isn’t happening, so what’s your point?

F*ck off, that’s my point.

Re: Oregon passed sweeping housing crisis laws

#263

Post by tlb » Sun, Jul 21, 2019, 6:23 PM UTC

devxvda wrote: post #262

dymk wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which isn’t happening, so what’s your point?

F*ck off, that’s my point.

This comment breaks the site guidelines. Would you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and use HN as intended?

Re: Oregon passed sweeping housing crisis laws

#264

Post by Misdicorl » Sun, Jul 21, 2019, 8:50 PM UTC

tathougies wrote: post #261

Misdicorl wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fatality rate spikes around 30mph. Most city traffic is definitely in that range (at least that I've experienced). > speeds above 55 mph were common on the 'nice' suburban street I grew up on Thats not a suburban street, thats a highway interconnecting the suburb. Non-driving connection within a suburb is certainly a huge problem.

I mean it was a street with on street parking, sidewalks, a school etc. I am unsure how you can make such a universal statement unless youve experienced literally every suburb in america. In san Francisco, most city traffic is less than 30 mph because of high density

A 55mph road is a highway regardless of other factors (in my opinion).

Sucks that a school is on it

Re: Oregon passed sweeping housing crisis laws

#265

Post by refurb » Sun, Jul 21, 2019, 9:51 PM UTC

kspaans wrote: post #259

refurb wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Problem is that laws change even when homes don’t change ownership. Your building might be worth$2M, then a rent control law is passed and suddenly it’s worth $1.5M.

How does this work? The $2m valuation would be based on income from current tenants, would it not? Most rent control laws, and especially not the one in Oregon, don't retroactively change rents charged to current tenants. That is unless the $2m valuation is based on a speculative estimate of how much rents will go up in the near future?

A good example would be single family homes in SF. Currently no rent control. If the rent control laws were changed to include SFHs, you’d see a pretty drastic decrease in the value of them, since yes, currently they are valued based on expected future rent increases.

Re: Oregon passed sweeping housing crisis laws

#266

Post by tathougies » Mon, Jul 22, 2019, 3:37 AM UTC

Misdicorl wrote: post #264

tathougies wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean it was a street with on street parking, sidewalks, a school etc. I am unsure how you can make such a universal statement unless youve experienced literally every suburb in america. In san Francisco, most city traffic is less than 30 mph because of high density

A 55mph road is a highway regardless of other factors (in my opinion). Sucks that a school is on it

I mean if you redefine everything to fit your preconceived notions then you shouldnt be surprised that everything matches

Re: Oregon passed sweeping housing crisis laws

#267

Post by TulliusCicero » Mon, Jul 22, 2019, 3:55 PM UTC

Misdicorl wrote: post #164

TulliusCicero wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_share

That link is only considering commutes to/from work. That traffic is very segregated in suburban communities. Notably, its also usually very far from where children hang out.

Fair, though it still indicates that Americans walk much less than Germans if for commuting Germans are using walking so much more.

Re: Oregon passed sweeping housing crisis laws

#268

Post by TulliusCicero » Mon, Jul 22, 2019, 3:59 PM UTC

Misdicorl wrote: post #169

TulliusCicero wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course they're more vehicle-vehicle in the US; hardly anyone walks in America. Just look at the stats. Even the walk-iest big city in the US, NYC, only has like 6% walk mode share. However, controlled for number of trips/distance, being a pedestrian in the US is generally quite dangerous compared to elsewhere.

I'd be interested to see a source about comparative pedestrian safety. I'd be literally shocked if small suburban streets weren't safer than almost any other option.

> I'd be literally shocked if small suburban streets weren't safer than almost any other option.

Depends on what you mean by 'small suburban streets' I guess. If you mean in small suburbs, I would find that surprising, if you mean the street itself being very narrow then yeah maybe. But relatively few American suburbs have actually narrow streets. To most Americans, "there's only barely enough room for parked cars on both sides plus 2 lanes of moving traffic to pass each other" means it's narrow.

Random reference I just saw: so far this year Seattle has had 10 traffic fatalities, 4 of them on foot vs 5 with vehicles, despite walking being far less popular than driving in Seattle (which is not nearly as walk-friendly as NYC).

Re: Oregon passed sweeping housing crisis laws

#269

Post by TulliusCicero » Mon, Jul 22, 2019, 4:04 PM UTC

Misdicorl wrote: post #201

TulliusCicero wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Come to Munich. I find it very difficult to tell how rich most neighborhoods are here, whether city or suburb, whereas in the US I usually noticed easily without even thinking. > Is de-stratisfying neighborhoods actually a worthwhile goal? Well, that depends on how you feel about social mobility and segregation, I suppose. If you support the rich and poor being kept separate from each other, if you want to keep socia…

> Come to Munich. I find it very difficult to tell how rich most neighborhoods are here, whether city or suburb That sounds really pleasant. I'd love to have that where I live. > Well, that depends on how you feel about social mobility and segregation, I suppose. If you support the rich and poor being kept separate from each other, if you want to keep social mobility low I think you're painting me into a corner here…

Stratified neighborhoods means stratified schools, means stratified networks of connections, which means less social mobility.

> Second, trying to manufacture non-stratification by telling communities what type of housing they must allow feels a little hamfisted

I'm sorry, but this is COMICALLY absurd at this point.

Here we have communities that have used a relatively recent invention, zoning regulation, to force a historically unprecedented urban pattern of building onto the vast majority of residential land in the US, with the express intent of keeping out undesirables. As the libertarians like to put it, at the point of a gun.

And you're saying the ones who want to loosen regulations, to return to more environmentally friendly, historically common urban building patterns, patterns that would not shut out the poor, are the ones "hamfistedly manufacturing" something?

I'm sorry, I'm having trouble believing that you're not being deliberately disingenuous at this point. It's like calling the removal of Jim Crow laws "hamfisted, manufactured non-segregation".

Re: Oregon passed sweeping housing crisis laws

#270

Post by TulliusCicero » Mon, Jul 22, 2019, 4:08 PM UTC

Misdicorl wrote: post #264

tathougies wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean it was a street with on street parking, sidewalks, a school etc. I am unsure how you can make such a universal statement unless youve experienced literally every suburb in america. In san Francisco, most city traffic is less than 30 mph because of high density

A 55mph road is a highway regardless of other factors (in my opinion). Sucks that a school is on it

"If I redefine everything to fit my parameters, then nothing can contradict me."

I mean, okay, but if you want to avoid being intellectually disingenuous you can't do that anymore. You don't get to just randomly redefine things until they fit your arguments better.