291–299 of 299 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there a similar source that would let you compare MSAs for building of housing units? I'd be interested to see how Boise's MSA lines up with the Bay Area. Most Californian transplants I'd met growing up in the area were from Sacremento/SoCal though.
Does this get you started? Population-adjusted new housing starts for both Boise and San Francisco MSAs since 2000. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=B6Uf
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It is understandable that people are selfish Existing residents resisting change really aren't any more selfish than new residents demanding change. Both are championing changes that are in their self interest at the expense of the self interest to others.
Sure, and every oppressed person demands changes in their self interest at the expense of the oppressor. Now, I'm not trying to call people who want to live in HCOL city but don't have money oppressed but want to point out that this line of thinking is unhelpful. What matters is the outcome for the majority of people now and in the future, and based on that I don't see how rights of the existing residents to tell the…
And with your attitude, I guess you celebrate colonialism. After all, those were people looking for new places to live.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it is understandable if people don't want the surroundings of their property cluttered with buildings.
It's understandable that people want control over property they don't own. Doesn't make it right though. And it doesn't make sense for the law to give them that control.
It's possible there was a promise of "quiet surroundings and lovely views" when they bought the land from the government. So the government should stick to those promises.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm pro density but the densification process really trips core parts of people's psyche. We're human beings. It affects your _home_. You've lived in a place for 10 years and suddenly you have no privacy because a big block of units gets stood up looking right over you. Or they block your sunlight, build right up to the boundary, or your quiet leafy neighbourhood just isn't quiet anymore and that's after you lived ne…
Weighing the Justice : 'I like they way my lawn is and i don't like construction noises' vs 'I can't get a job because it's too expensive to rent or buy where the jobs are, so i live in poverty' (or i can't start family because i can only afford a room-share, or any number of other effects from NIMBYism)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's understandable that people want control over property they don't own. Doesn't make it right though. And it doesn't make sense for the law to give them that control.
I think it makes sense to give people some rights. For example if you build a highway right in front of their house, it devalues their investment, and they could deserve compensation. Or make it a garbage dump. Are you really of the opinion the the government should be allowed to simply create a garbage dump in front of your house? What about a garbage dump in a poor black neighborhood, would you consider that OK? It…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, and every oppressed person demands changes in their self interest at the expense of the oppressor. Now, I'm not trying to call people who want to live in HCOL city but don't have money oppressed but want to point out that this line of thinking is unhelpful. What matters is the outcome for the majority of people now and in the future, and based on that I don't see how rights of the existing residents to tell the…
"research supports that conclusion" - from some marxist think tank perhaps. Definitely bullshit. People are not better off without property rights. And with your attitude, I guess you celebrate colonialism. After all, those were people looking for new places to live.
Sure, but the problem at hand is they have more than property rights, they have rights to a neighbor's property, conversely my neighbors have rights to my property, and how's that fair under capitalism. Besides, there are other capitalist countries where zoning is not a local level affair and they don't seem to be marxist hell-holes as you imply.
> I guess you celebrate colonialism
I don't celebrate anything but people are born in increasing numbers, the whole economy and governments rely on this trend so I think it is only fair to the new generations if we at least return to the respect of the private property which is long gone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"research supports that conclusion" - from some marxist think tank perhaps. Definitely bullshit. People are not better off without property rights. And with your attitude, I guess you celebrate colonialism. After all, those were people looking for new places to live.
> People are not better off without property rights. Sure, but the problem at hand is they have more than property rights, they have rights to a neighbor's property, conversely my neighbors have rights to my property, and how's that fair under capitalism. Besides, there are other capitalist countries where zoning is not a local level affair and they don't seem to be marxist hell-holes as you imply. > I guess you cele…
You are talking about a kind of societal contract of society having to provide housing for people. Likewise, there are other societal contracts.
"I don't celebrate anything but people are born in increasing numbers, the whole economy and governments rely on this trend so I think it is only fair to the new generations if we at least return to the respect of the private property which is long gone."
The argument "the economy depends on more people being born" doesn't really fly in a discussion of how more people cause problems (like needing a place to stay). I don't think most people are asking other people to have lots of children.
Even if you assume everybody should be provided with such a place, why in my backyard (or anybody else's)? Since you seem to have given up on the notion that people might deserve a nice place to stay in, why not just build ugly skyscrapers somewhere else (other than my backyard), and house people there? How about starting in your backyard?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it makes sense to give people some rights. For example if you build a highway right in front of their house, it devalues their investment, and they could deserve compensation. Or make it a garbage dump. Are you really of the opinion the the government should be allowed to simply create a garbage dump in front of your house? What about a garbage dump in a poor black neighborhood, would you consider that OK? It…
You're debating a strawman. The argument is that NIMBYs oppose more housing in a place already zoned for housing. No one's talking about building a nuclear power plant next to a kindergarten.