Attack of the Fifty-Foot NIMBYs
i.stanford.edu
Attack of the Fifty-Foot NIMBYs
1–10 of 95 posts
Re: Attack of the Fifty-Foot NIMBYs
#2Also frustrating is when a local municipality lowers the speed limit on a section of highway that runs through it to produce a speed trap, as a way of generating revenue.
Re: Attack of the Fifty-Foot NIMBYs
#3Excellent analysis of the situation - very interesting and could be with other consequences and applications, whenever the minority can be the one to both benefit on, propose, and vote on a change that the majority will have to bear and pay - all the while using a false pretense like safety.
The proposed solution to study the consequences could also be returned and simplified - to mesure the impact of the proposed changed on property value and to refuse by default any change that would raise it.
(the best way would be to accept changes that increase the global utility, but it might be hard to measure - giving a number to the increased property value would be hard, but giving a number due to lost time due to lower speeds or other inconveniences would be even harder)
Re: Attack of the Fifty-Foot NIMBYs
#4Excellent analysis of the situation - very interesting and could be with other consequences and applications, whenever the minority can be the one to both benefit on, propose, and vote on a change that the majority will have to bear and pay - all the while using a false pretense like safety. The proposed solution to study the consequences could also be returned and simplified - to mesure the impact of the proposed ch…
Wow that's luck - just when I was browsing around I found the perfect analysis on overcoming bias : senior voters and their healtcare - paid for by the majority, but since seniors vote more, they favour the candidate serving their interest - at the expanse of the majority
http://www.overcomingbias.com/2012/09/us-politics-of-medicin...
Very interesting indeed- it seems to be the simplest pitfall of democracy : when the repartition of voters becomes detached from the repartition of the consequences and advantages.
Re: Attack of the Fifty-Foot NIMBYs
#5The analysis is reasonable overall, but trying to distinguish between "good" and "bad" NIMBYs is a pretty serious flaw. You have to put halfway houses and power plants somewhere. Those NIMBYs are still stealing from other people, they're just stealing from the residents of some other place whose residents have less free time or political capital to prevent something that lowers property values from being constructed in their neighborhood. Or they're again stealing from society at large if they prevent such things from being built at all. In either case they create a societal cost by adding the cost of the fight to the cost of building necessary things.
Re: Attack of the Fifty-Foot NIMBYs
#6The analysis is reasonable overall, but trying to distinguish between "good" and "bad" NIMBYs is a pretty serious flaw. You have to put halfway houses and power plants somewhere . Those NIMBYs are still stealing from other people, they're just stealing from the residents of some other place whose residents have less free time or political capital to prevent something that lowers property values from being constructed…
The OP and your post have the word 'stealing' in. It's an incorrect use of the word.
It's not hard to find respectactable nimby cases. What if someone wanted to pub a pub at the end of your street? You are not a drinker, and you object to the prospect of people stumbling down your street shouting at strange hours, leaving mess on your property and more chance of intoxicated drivers.
Re: Attack of the Fifty-Foot NIMBYs
#7Excellent analysis of the situation - very interesting and could be with other consequences and applications, whenever the minority can be the one to both benefit on, propose, and vote on a change that the majority will have to bear and pay - all the while using a false pretense like safety. The proposed solution to study the consequences could also be returned and simplified - to mesure the impact of the proposed ch…
Wow that's luck - just when I was browsing around I found the perfect analysis on overcoming bias : senior voters and their healtcare - paid for by the majority, but since seniors vote more, they favour the candidate serving their interest - at the expanse of the majority http://www.overcomingbias.com/2012/09/us-politics-of-medicin... Very interesting indeed- it seems to be the simplest pitfall of democracy : when th…
> senior voters and their healtcare - paid for by the majority, but since seniors vote more, they favour the candidate serving their interest - at the expanse of the majority
It's difficult to see how this is at the expense of the majority since it's not exclusive: the majority will eventually become members of the beneficial group. I.e., why not have a policy that benefits the elderly since most of us will one day be elderly?
Re: Attack of the Fifty-Foot NIMBYs
#8The analysis is reasonable overall, but trying to distinguish between "good" and "bad" NIMBYs is a pretty serious flaw. You have to put halfway houses and power plants somewhere . Those NIMBYs are still stealing from other people, they're just stealing from the residents of some other place whose residents have less free time or political capital to prevent something that lowers property values from being constructed…
The OP and your post have the word 'stealing' in. It's an incorrect use of the word. It's not hard to find respectactable nimby cases. What if someone wanted to pub a pub at the end of your street? You are not a drinker, and you object to the prospect of people stumbling down your street shouting at strange hours, leaving mess on your property and more chance of intoxicated drivers.
Neighborhood pubs/bars of the sort that are attended primarily by people in the neighborhood are actually beneficial to neighborhood security and quality of life.
Anything that gets the people who actually live there out on the street, particularly in the nighttime hours, increases security.
Our modern, sterile "city planning" where everything is separated and zoned off into their own areas is a huge factor in the decline of our quality of life.
For an extensive treatment of this thesis, see the work of Jane Jacobs.
Re: Attack of the Fifty-Foot NIMBYs
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow that's luck - just when I was browsing around I found the perfect analysis on overcoming bias : senior voters and their healtcare - paid for by the majority, but since seniors vote more, they favour the candidate serving their interest - at the expanse of the majority http://www.overcomingbias.com/2012/09/us-politics-of-medicin... Very interesting indeed- it seems to be the simplest pitfall of democracy : when th…
> senior voters and their healtcare - paid for by the majority, but since seniors vote more, they favour the candidate serving their interest - at the expanse of the majority It's difficult to see how this is at the expense of the majority since it's not exclusive: the majority will eventually become members of the beneficial group. I.e., why not have a policy that benefits the elderly since most of us will one day b…
Also, overall health situation tends to deteriorate as one ages, so seniors as a group would need more healthcare dollars per capita compared to the younger population groups. No wonder healthcare becomes one of the most important issues for seniors.
Re: Attack of the Fifty-Foot NIMBYs
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
> senior voters and their healtcare - paid for by the majority, but since seniors vote more, they favour the candidate serving their interest - at the expanse of the majority It's difficult to see how this is at the expense of the majority since it's not exclusive: the majority will eventually become members of the beneficial group. I.e., why not have a policy that benefits the elderly since most of us will one day b…
Also, overall health situation tends to deteriorate as one ages, so seniors as a group would need more healthcare dollars per capita compared to the younger population groups. No wonder healthcare becomes one of the most important issues for seniors.
No- healthcare is an investment with a negative interest rate, ie you can only try to maintain your capital if you keep investing more and more - with a diminishing return since it ends in death anyway (with the current technology)
In this specific case, a better investment strategy is to put the money where you will get the most of it, i.e. on the health of people still young, and reduce the investment as the people age.