11–20 of 103 posts
Umm...Really? If one side is full of violence and degradation, and the other side has catered lunches and free massages, I'm going to choose the catered lunch side 10 times out of 10.
Can someone enlighten me as to what a Google bus is? Googling it doesn't shed any light...
Gosh, wouldn't the world be such a nicer place if society solved its housing problems by building more housing with a higher density instead of having these pointless zero-sum dominance contests? But of course, that would defeat the whole purpose. The point is not to build more housing, it's to have a zero-sum dominance contest and come out on top!
Imagine if you lived in Hawaii, and the island was just starting to become popular because it is so nice. Everyone was moving there, and rents were going through the roof because there is nowhere to expand. What you want isn't Manhattan sky-rises on your little island; you want cheap, pre-discovery Hawaii with its thatch huts and casual atmosphere back.
This is always the downside of gentrification. It's not like their claims haven't been heard before, but I don't know if it's ever happened so quickly. Does anyone living in the bay area want to comment on whether their claims are actually valid and, if so, what can be done to help it?
Also I assume the author is implying their gentrification of Oakland is cool and acceptable but Google employees gentrification is so not.
This vitriol really needs some perspective, although I'm pretty convinced this has to be a troll.
Says the guy who prints it out using a computer (and some sort of word-processor).
Already seeing the responses about how their worldview is simplistic, how the protestors are acting out against people who are there to help them... but does anyone want to comment on the actual complaint that the influx of tech money is increasing the cost of living for those not working in the industry? It seems equally simplistic to just dismiss their complaints when they seem to have a very valid problem. This is…
Gosh, wouldn't the world be such a nicer place if society solved its housing problems by building more housing with a higher density instead of having these pointless zero-sum dominance contests? But of course, that would defeat the whole purpose. The point is not to build more housing, it's to have a zero-sum dominance contest and come out on top!
The point is not dominance contests, the point is people want to keep their low density housing even as housing costs rise in their city. Imagine if you lived in Hawaii, and the island was just starting to become popular because it is so nice. Everyone was moving there, and rents were going through the roof because there is nowhere to expand. What you want isn't Manhattan sky-rises on your little island; you want che…