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

Long Beach has temporarily suspended container stacking limitations

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 514 posts

Re: Long Beach has temporarily suspended container stacking limitations

#21

Post by blntechie »

sushsjsuauahab wrote: post #13
burlesona wrote: post #4

Zoning laws prevent stacking containers more than 2 high. FFS. Zoning as practiced in the US may be the most pervasive, banal evil in the country. It kills our GDP[1], is a major driver of racial inequity[2], increases wealth inequality[3], and creates car-dependency which has horrible public health impacts[4]. Yet somehow nearly no one in America is aware of this or concerned about it. I wish I understood why that i…

Well, I would be pretty angry if someone built a gigantic apartment complex next to my normal house, since I bought it on the impression I would not have that as a neighbor

That’s ridiculous. I can understand concerns about a dump yard or a concert venue or an industrial plant coming next to a residential suburban house but concerns about an apartment ? There will be legitimate concerns like increased traffic, increased enrollments in school district etc. which need to be solved but not stopping an apartment coming up altogether.

Also it’s unfair to ask the outside world around your house to be frozen in time because you bought a house at a period of time and setting which you liked.

Re: Long Beach has temporarily suspended container stacking limitations

#22

Post by [deleted] »

burlesona wrote: post #4

Zoning laws prevent stacking containers more than 2 high. FFS. Zoning as practiced in the US may be the most pervasive, banal evil in the country. It kills our GDP[1], is a major driver of racial inequity[2], increases wealth inequality[3], and creates car-dependency which has horrible public health impacts[4]. Yet somehow nearly no one in America is aware of this or concerned about it. I wish I understood why that i…

[deleted]

Re: Long Beach has temporarily suspended container stacking limitations

#23

Post by burlesona »

Asooka wrote: post #11
burlesona wrote: post #4

Zoning laws prevent stacking containers more than 2 high. FFS. Zoning as practiced in the US may be the most pervasive, banal evil in the country. It kills our GDP[1], is a major driver of racial inequity[2], increases wealth inequality[3], and creates car-dependency which has horrible public health impacts[4]. Yet somehow nearly no one in America is aware of this or concerned about it. I wish I understood why that i…

Some form of zoning must exist because you don't want people living next to an incinerator power plant for instance, but like any good thing, it can be taken to an extreme and micromanaged into evil.

That’s not really true. It’s perfectly possible to directly regulate, prohibit and/or tax nuisances and externalities directly without zoning.

Re: Long Beach has temporarily suspended container stacking limitations

#24

Post by nrmitchi »

gtirloni wrote: post #18
sushsjsuauahab wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I would be pretty angry if someone built a gigantic apartment complex next to my normal house, since I bought it on the impression I would not have that as a neighbor

You should have bought a considerable amount of land next to your property too then. Just like Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg. I'm sure no one would complain about that since, you know, it'd be yours and not someone else's.

I'm not here to defend unnecessary zoning restrictions, but your argument here is that the right to not be affected by the externalities of someone else's decisions should be limited to the uber-wealthy?.

It's completely reasonable to believe that a given person should be capable of quiet enjoyment of their property without having to purchase everything remotely close to it.

Re: Long Beach has temporarily suspended container stacking limitations

#25

Post by ergocoder »

spothedog1 wrote: post #19
sushsjsuauahab wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I would be pretty angry if someone built a gigantic apartment complex next to my normal house, since I bought it on the impression I would not have that as a neighbor

If someone built a gigantic apartment complex next to your house it would mean that the demand for housing in your neighborhood was massive and restricted by zoning. Your land value would skyrocket by allowing apartment buildings and you could take a huge pay day and move somewhere farther out from the city. You shouldn't get to halt US GDP growth in its tracks because you want to dictate what your neighbors do with…

> Your land value would skyrocket by allowing apartment buildings

That is too far away. That may or may not happen

In the short term, the supply just increases significantly. Probably also the traffic and other infrastructure use.

Not that I disagree or agree with nimby. Just pointing it out because you only point out one side.

Re: Long Beach has temporarily suspended container stacking limitations

#26

Post by csee »

TameAntelope wrote: post #20
csee wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the POTUS personally commits to resolving the issue, it is concerning that an outsider can literally sail through and identify a high leverage solution. Like what the hell is going on with our institutions. There might be an explanation but it looks really bad from the outside.

Do you know who Ryan Peterson is? He's not an "outsider", he is the CEO of a digital supply chain company. He's a "foremost expert", to be sure.

A large team under POTUS has been working on this for two weeks and the Flexport CEO can sail through and come up with this within 24 hours of doing that? That's embarrassing and concerning.

EDIT yes he's not an outsider to the industry, I mean he's an outsider to the group of officials who were tasked with solving this problem.

Re: Long Beach has temporarily suspended container stacking limitations

#27

Post by mastax »

micro_cam wrote: post #15

Does this mean it is a cheap time to buy empty shipping containers?

No. Shipping container prices have risen threefold. The transshipment companies who have to deal with the containers piling up don't own the containers, and can't sell them to you.

Re: Long Beach has temporarily suspended container stacking limitations

#28

Post by downut »

burlesona wrote: post #23
Asooka wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some form of zoning must exist because you don't want people living next to an incinerator power plant for instance, but like any good thing, it can be taken to an extreme and micromanaged into evil.

That’s not really true. It’s perfectly possible to directly regulate, prohibit and/or tax nuisances and externalities directly without zoning.

But the key is who regulates, prohibits, etc.

If that power is local, NIMBY always wins. These decisions must be made at the state level. Cities are way too fractured into myriad municipalities competing for jobs and "quality" housing.

Re: Long Beach has temporarily suspended container stacking limitations

#29

Post by b112 »

burlesona wrote: post #23
Asooka wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some form of zoning must exist because you don't want people living next to an incinerator power plant for instance, but like any good thing, it can be taken to an extreme and micromanaged into evil.

That’s not really true. It’s perfectly possible to directly regulate, prohibit and/or tax nuisances and externalities directly without zoning.

If you tax unequally, depending upon location, then that's just zoning with another name, except the rich can ignore it.

Re: Long Beach has temporarily suspended container stacking limitations

#30

Post by isoskeles »

gtirloni wrote: post #18
sushsjsuauahab wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I would be pretty angry if someone built a gigantic apartment complex next to my normal house, since I bought it on the impression I would not have that as a neighbor

You should have bought a considerable amount of land next to your property too then. Just like Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg. I'm sure no one would complain about that since, you know, it'd be yours and not someone else's.

"You should've been filthy rich like Bill Gates!"

Really?

Post reply on HN