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

New Yorkers consider relocating post coronavirus

movebuddha.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 144 posts

Re: New Yorkers consider relocating post coronavirus

#131

Post by autokad »

_hardwaregeek wrote: post #61
joyj2nd wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"New York's brutal humidity in the summer. " Dude, either I have been away too long from NYC or you have not lived in hot humid places.

New York isn't as bad as say, Houston or SE Asia, but the subway platforms can get pretty bad: https://ny.curbed.com/2018/8/10/17674900/nyc-subway-summer-h... Compare this to Seattle where I could wear a sweater in August and I'd say it's brutal.

> "Compare this to Seattle where I could wear a sweater in August and I'd say it's brutal."

That just means New York has a summer time.

I never found New York very humid, but Seattle is more humid than New York.

Re: New Yorkers consider relocating post coronavirus

#133

Post by mdszy »

leetcrew wrote: post #107
mdszy wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$1500/month is absolutely insane for one bedroom lol My apartment is $850 and that gets me 2 bedrooms, 1200sqft. In a definitely not as large city mind you, but $1500 is insanely expensive for one bedroom.

what kinds of businesses can you walk to?

Paying double my rent is not worth being able to walk more places, sorry bud.

Re: New Yorkers consider relocating post coronavirus

#134

Post by malandrew »

ahelwer wrote: post #96
WalterBright wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> low taxes - directly contributes to the issue of homelessness and half of your complaints. I've lived here for 40 years. It's always had low taxes, but the problems you're talking about are very recent.

Yes, the rise in rent has been quite dramatic recently - and our social services have been utterly ill-prepared to handle the fallout, because of low taxes.

So you're saying that we should raise taxes to spend on the homeless problem? That hasn't worked for San Francisco, which spends a crazy amount per person and the only thing they have to show for it is more homelessness. Perhaps your heuristic is wrong. Perhaps, when you pay for something, you tend to get more of it, not less.

I can't think of a single place that spends money on homelessness that doesn't get more of it.

Furthermore, if a city is expensive and getting more expensive like SF and Seattle, it means that city is becoming harder for people without decent earning power to stick around. It's like a video game being changed from easy mode to hard mode. Seattle and SF are hard mode, which means most people at the bottom will fail to ever succeed there. By spending the money in Seattle and San Francisco, you're throwing good money after bad money because you're helping many people stay in a place in which they likely won't ever succeed. The money would be better spent in locales around the country where it's easy mode for someone to get back on their feet.

Trying to solve homelessness in Seattle and San Francisco is one of the most egregious wastes of money I've ever seen. It's practically a homelessness industrial complex in San Francisco already and starting to become one in Seattle. Everyone advocating most ardently for it are people whose salary is paid from these tax dollars. It's the Shirky Principle in action.

https://kk.org/thetechnium/the-shirky-prin/

Re: New Yorkers consider relocating post coronavirus

#135

Post by groby_b »

restalis wrote: post #80
groby_b wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disagreement on #2 and #3: #2: Suburbs/exurbs are completely unsustainable. I'd predict that after this is over, local food sources will figure prominently on people's minds. We might see a return to smaller satellite cities if zoning changes to a saner mixed zoning approach. (You don't want big box stores. You do want smaller stores embedded in the local community. I'm not sure there's the political will to go there…

"...and way too high rent in cities..." Rental cost merely reflect the supply and demand. A significant drop in demand should put pressure on rental costs. However, I'm skeptic that such a drop will come from "the desire to be close to family/friends/social groups". People moved against that before and I don't see that changing. I also don't see any time soon people getting less interested in the opportunity that com…

We've currently got an extended period of time ahead, where we'll have to learn to do without a lot of the cultural opportunities that come with city life.

A lot will depend on how much and how rapidly lockdown can be eased. If we spend 18-24 months without many of the benefits/opportunities of city life, or at least with those opportunities significantly diminished, culture will rapidly shift to different models - and those are likely more location independent.

And yes, of course rent is a supply/demand question, but the current experience is "the rent is too damn high", and that puts a certain amount of pressure on city living. Take away enough upsides, and it's not worth it any more.

Rent might drop as a result, but it will be a lagging indicator of cities becoming unpopular.

At the same time, closeness to social groups is being valued higher, because we're currently learning that a lonely/isolated life is not a good life. And, like any traumatic event, we're also learning that a supportive community matters, a lot.

You seem to assume that current forces and values hold, despite a global traumatic event. I think that we're in for a complete change of the landscape. The future will tell.

Re: New Yorkers consider relocating post coronavirus

#136

Post by ahelwer »

malandrew wrote: post #134
ahelwer wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, the rise in rent has been quite dramatic recently - and our social services have been utterly ill-prepared to handle the fallout, because of low taxes.

So you're saying that we should raise taxes to spend on the homeless problem? That hasn't worked for San Francisco, which spends a crazy amount per person and the only thing they have to show for it is more homelessness. Perhaps your heuristic is wrong. Perhaps, when you pay for something, you tend to get more of it, not less. I can't think of a single place that spends money on homelessness that doesn't get more of…

The only viable long-term solution to homelessness is building socialized housing with integrated mental health services. The patchwork of shelters and social programs will never work. Building socialized housing requires a lot of money, and this is what the Tax Amazon movement is trying to accomplish: https://www.taxamazon.net/sign

I ardently advocate for this and my salary isn't paid by it, because I want to live in a strong society where shelter is provided for everyone who needs it. Your vision of society is, what, to ship people off somewhere else? Out of sight out of mind, right?

Re: New Yorkers consider relocating post coronavirus

#137

Post by malandrew »

ahelwer wrote: post #136
malandrew wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're saying that we should raise taxes to spend on the homeless problem? That hasn't worked for San Francisco, which spends a crazy amount per person and the only thing they have to show for it is more homelessness. Perhaps your heuristic is wrong. Perhaps, when you pay for something, you tend to get more of it, not less. I can't think of a single place that spends money on homelessness that doesn't get more of…

The only viable long-term solution to homelessness is building socialized housing with integrated mental health services. The patchwork of shelters and social programs will never work. Building socialized housing requires a lot of money, and this is what the Tax Amazon movement is trying to accomplish: https://www.taxamazon.net/sign I ardently advocate for this and my salary isn't paid by it, because I want to live i…

> The only viable long-term solution to homelessness is building socialized housing with integrated mental health services.

Back up that assertion with evidence. Also include evidence showing that places like Seattle and San Francisco are the best places to implement such solutions.

> and this is what the Tax Amazon movement is trying to accomplish: https://www.taxamazon.net/sign

Why should Amazon pay for this? If you think this is so important and the right solution, how much money have you donated towards this? If you're expecting Amazon to pay for this then you've got no skin in the game and risk nothing by being wrong.

> I ardently advocate for this and my salary isn't paid by it

And as an ardent advocate, how much have you spent on this?

> Your vision of society is, what, to ship people off somewhere else? Out of sight out of mind, right?

I have no vision. I'm a utilitarian and care purely about successful outcomes, optics be damned. I'm just not so naive as to think that the best place to try and get people back on their feet are places where they stand the least chance of doing so because even competent, educated people that have no vices like drug addiction have to work hard to succeed in a place like Seattle and San Francisco.

Your approach just puts people in the middle of the ocean, but gives them a life jackets. They are almost certainly still going to drown under those conditions. My proposal is to find a kiddy pool or at least someplace shallow with calm waters and give them a life jacket.

You have to have more heart than brains to think some of the most expensive, competitive markets like Seattle and San Francisco are good places to try and get people back on their feet again. And if you genuinely think that such an approach is a good one, you should be the first to spend your hard-earned money to prove it.

Re: New Yorkers consider relocating post coronavirus

#138

Post by ahelwer »

malandrew wrote: post #137
ahelwer wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only viable long-term solution to homelessness is building socialized housing with integrated mental health services. The patchwork of shelters and social programs will never work. Building socialized housing requires a lot of money, and this is what the Tax Amazon movement is trying to accomplish: https://www.taxamazon.net/sign I ardently advocate for this and my salary isn't paid by it, because I want to live i…

> The only viable long-term solution to homelessness is building socialized housing with integrated mental health services. Back up that assertion with evidence. Also include evidence showing that places like Seattle and San Francisco are the best places to implement such solutions. > and this is what the Tax Amazon movement is trying to accomplish: https://www.taxamazon.net/sign Why should Amazon pay for this? If yo…

I donated $12.5k to Plymouth Housing (housing-first org in Seattle) last year, which was matched by Microsoft to $25k. It barely matters, voluntary individual charity won't solve structural problems. Given that half your post is now an utterly wrong & irrelevant personal attack, I have license to tell you your mode of interaction here (and in other comments, from a brief perusal of your profile) comes off as incredibly smug and not nearly so clever as you clearly believe. We've all read Taleb, you don't have intellectual superpowers from knowing what skin in the game is.

The Tax Amazon movement would also levy a tax on Microsoft, because it's a tax on all big businesses which operate within Seattle, which I'm perfectly happy about, but I'm sure you're very used to being wrong about everything so this matters not.

I have no idea how you can care about "successful outcomes" without vision since success is not a value-free metric. That should suffice to make you think a bit, I'm going to cut short the gish-gallop here because interacting with you is generally unpleasant. Goodbye.

Re: New Yorkers consider relocating post coronavirus

#139

Post by malandrew »

ahelwer wrote: post #138
malandrew wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only viable long-term solution to homelessness is building socialized housing with integrated mental health services. Back up that assertion with evidence. Also include evidence showing that places like Seattle and San Francisco are the best places to implement such solutions. > and this is what the Tax Amazon movement is trying to accomplish: https://www.taxamazon.net/sign Why should Amazon pay for this? If yo…

I donated $12.5k to Plymouth Housing (housing-first org in Seattle) last year, which was matched by Microsoft to $25k. It barely matters, voluntary individual charity won't solve structural problems. Given that half your post is now an utterly wrong & irrelevant personal attack, I have license to tell you your mode of interaction here (and in other comments, from a brief perusal of your profile) comes off as incredib…

So you work for Microsoft, which explains why you're interested in taxing Amazon. Good to know that your conflict of interest is now laid bare. Your salary may not be paid by the homelessness industrial complex, but it is paid by a direct competitor to the entity you want to see taxed to pay for this. Let's tax Microsoft instead.

Re: New Yorkers consider relocating post coronavirus

#140

Post by ahelwer »

malandrew wrote: post #139
ahelwer wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I donated $12.5k to Plymouth Housing (housing-first org in Seattle) last year, which was matched by Microsoft to $25k. It barely matters, voluntary individual charity won't solve structural problems. Given that half your post is now an utterly wrong & irrelevant personal attack, I have license to tell you your mode of interaction here (and in other comments, from a brief perusal of your profile) comes off as incredib…

So you work for Microsoft, which explains why you're interested in taxing Amazon. Good to know that your conflict of interest is now laid bare. Your salary may not be paid by the homelessness industrial complex, but it is paid by a direct competitor to the entity you want to see taxed to pay for this. Let's tax Microsoft instead.

You're really stuck on this desire to expose my fraudulent underlying motivations for not wanting homeless people to die in the streets. You'll be happy to learn far smarter people than you have taken a crack at this problem! Go read the first few sections of Industrial Society and its Future and you'll have all the ammo you need to attack leftist motivations. Its analysis is quite a bit more robust than your (frankly, extremely basic) idea that everyone must have a financial stake in policy to desire its realization. Happy to help.
Post reply on HN