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

Move fast, break things: A review of Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson

networked.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 134 posts

Re: Move fast, break things: A review of Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson

#51

Post by janderson215 »

ilrwbwrkhv wrote: post #44

I gave this criticism to Peter Thiel a long time back that he complains about. We were promised flying cars but all we got is 140 characters and yet the startup that he has is basically a chartjs version of a database with an aggressive sales strategy like Oracle. Not exactly world changing now and that is the problem with most of these critics of society, just like movie critics. They can make a great argument over…

I’m somewhat with you in principle with the first paragraph, but the second paragraph is factually incorrect. Marc Andreessen was a web visionary/pioneer and successful founder and investor. IMO, to say otherwise only hurts your argument.

Re: Move fast, break things: A review of Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson

#52

Post by [deleted] »

davidw wrote: post #40
kuboble wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But this is exactly the issue. It's not the wannabe home owners who are protesting but the current home owners who are rightly afraid that it will immensely reduce value of their homes.

Here's a specific hearing that I attended where exactly that dynamic played out https://bendyimby.com/2024/04/16/the-hearing-and-the-housing... A room full of angry, wealthy, older people who showed up at 11AM on a weekday to stop homes for people who doubtless earn less than they do. And in that case, they were successful, sadly.

[deleted]

Re: Move fast, break things: A review of Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson

#53

Post by xnx »

kuboble wrote: post #38
energy123 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For people who don't want to live in density, the counter intuitive thing is that it'll be easier to buy a single detached house if you allow more condos, especially 2/3 bedroom units, because there will be less competition. It's the pigeon hole principle.

But this is exactly the issue. It's not the wannabe home owners who are protesting but the current home owners who are rightly afraid that it will immensely reduce value of their homes.

Would it reduce the value of their homes? My property would be a lot more if it were legal to tear it down and put up a 10 unit apartment building.

I think the complaint is more than they don't want their neighbors houses replaced by apartment buildings.

Re: Move fast, break things: A review of Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson

#54

Post by xnx »

davidw wrote: post #40
kuboble wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But this is exactly the issue. It's not the wannabe home owners who are protesting but the current home owners who are rightly afraid that it will immensely reduce value of their homes.

Here's a specific hearing that I attended where exactly that dynamic played out https://bendyimby.com/2024/04/16/the-hearing-and-the-housing... A room full of angry, wealthy, older people who showed up at 11AM on a weekday to stop homes for people who doubtless earn less than they do. And in that case, they were successful, sadly.

I'm conflicted. Who should be allowed to say what gets built in an area: the neighbors, the neighborhood, the city, the county, the state, the federal government?

Re: Move fast, break things: A review of Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson

#55

Post by nradov »

kuboble wrote: post #38
energy123 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For people who don't want to live in density, the counter intuitive thing is that it'll be easier to buy a single detached house if you allow more condos, especially 2/3 bedroom units, because there will be less competition. It's the pigeon hole principle.

But this is exactly the issue. It's not the wannabe home owners who are protesting but the current home owners who are rightly afraid that it will immensely reduce value of their homes.

That's a common misconception. The most active NIMBYs have lived in their homes for years and intend to die there. They don't intend to ever sell and aren't particularly concerned with property values per se. What they do care about are quality of life issues: noise, traffic, privacy, parking, crime, litter, etc. The more neighbors you have, the greater the risk that some of them will be antisocial assholes who let their pit bulls run loose and have screaming arguments late at night (which I have experienced in person). This may seem selfish but if you want to promote more housing development then you need to understand their concerns.

Re: Move fast, break things: A review of Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson

#56

Post by heavymetalpoizn »

Panzer04 wrote: post #39

I think the crux of the matter is, as the author states: "even a positive-sum world contains winners and losers" The core of the problem is that we don't want to trample the losers (lest those tools be used against us), but at the same time, someone is often going to come worse (from their perspective) from some very worthwhile changes. In some cases, it seems like we can just use money to compensate them, but inevit…

[dead]

Re: Move fast, break things: A review of Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson

#57

Post by [deleted] »

nradov wrote: post #55
kuboble wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But this is exactly the issue. It's not the wannabe home owners who are protesting but the current home owners who are rightly afraid that it will immensely reduce value of their homes.

That's a common misconception. The most active NIMBYs have lived in their homes for years and intend to die there. They don't intend to ever sell and aren't particularly concerned with property values per se . What they do care about are quality of life issues: noise, traffic, privacy, parking, crime, litter, etc. The more neighbors you have, the greater the risk that some of them will be antisocial assholes who let…

[deleted]

Re: Move fast, break things: A review of Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson

#58

Post by tptacek »

nradov wrote: post #55
kuboble wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But this is exactly the issue. It's not the wannabe home owners who are protesting but the current home owners who are rightly afraid that it will immensely reduce value of their homes.

That's a common misconception. The most active NIMBYs have lived in their homes for years and intend to die there. They don't intend to ever sell and aren't particularly concerned with property values per se . What they do care about are quality of life issues: noise, traffic, privacy, parking, crime, litter, etc. The more neighbors you have, the greater the risk that some of them will be antisocial assholes who let…

That may be true in some places, but in the Village of Oak Park, where I live, it's definitely not. Places like Oak Park --- wealthy inner-ring suburbs of major American cities --- are defined by their school systems. Those schools drive property taxes, which ratchet down affordability. Housing is dominated by SFZ lots, and the houses built on those lots are rational acquisitions only for families of school-aged children, most of whom will sell when their youngest graduate.

If long-term homeowners want to age in place in their houses in Elgin and Buffalo Grove, free from the distractions of density and traffic, I don't have a problem with that. But inner-ring suburbs like Oak Park and Evanston exist primarily to divert school funding from the broader metro area into wealthy enclaves; they create, in effect, de facto private school systems. Homeowners there have no moral standing to resist density.

Re: Move fast, break things: A review of Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson

#59

Post by ilrwbwrkhv »

janderson215 wrote: post #51
ilrwbwrkhv wrote: post #44

I gave this criticism to Peter Thiel a long time back that he complains about. We were promised flying cars but all we got is 140 characters and yet the startup that he has is basically a chartjs version of a database with an aggressive sales strategy like Oracle. Not exactly world changing now and that is the problem with most of these critics of society, just like movie critics. They can make a great argument over…

I’m somewhat with you in principle with the first paragraph, but the second paragraph is factually incorrect. Marc Andreessen was a web visionary/pioneer and successful founder and investor. IMO, to say otherwise only hurts your argument.

I know that story intimately. He and Eric Bina wrote Mosiac for three months.

Let's just say the Dotcom boom is how he and many others made their money.

Re: Move fast, break things: A review of Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson

#60

Post by TimorousBestie »

dralley wrote: post #41
tgma wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fucking everyone does No. Many people don't. Lots more don't have it as a priority. Ted Kaczynski and all the climate-change crowd come to mind. Also you conveniently deleted my first word "deregulation."

Fine, 98% of the population would like to see increased economic development. The point is that you would be very hard pressed to find any issue in American politics less controversial. Degrowth is incredibly fringe. You wouldn't even get 10% at a Bernie Sanders rally to agree. Pointing to the unibomber is hardly a great way to prove the position is mainstream. I started with your latter point because it was just so…

Agreed. Even the Greens (0.56% vote share in 2024) do not support either de-growth, no-growth, or low-growth in their platform.

As a non sequitur only tangentially related to the discussion, Kaczynski is dead.

Post reply on HN