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

Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness

kcrw.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 376 posts

Re: Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness

#221

Post by reader_x »

jlmorton wrote: post #17

Imagine you're a municipality like San Francisco. You control all of the zoning regulations, and many of the permitting requirements. You have a AA+ credit rating, and even in today's higher rate environment, you can borrow billions of dollars at 6%. You already own oodles of land. You can build to whatever height you want within reason, because you control the zoning, and you even control many of the ordinances that…

A municipality is run by a group of individuals elected by other individuals, whereas you have framed your housing policy proposal as if pitching to a dictator.

Imagining how we might govern unfettered by frustrating negotiations with others is fun but dangerous.

Re: Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness

#222

Post by geodel »

tinyspacewizard wrote: post #36
jlmorton wrote: post #17

Imagine you're a municipality like San Francisco. You control all of the zoning regulations, and many of the permitting requirements. You have a AA+ credit rating, and even in today's higher rate environment, you can borrow billions of dollars at 6%. You already own oodles of land. You can build to whatever height you want within reason, because you control the zoning, and you even control many of the ordinances that…

If you're a benevolent dictator then it's easy and obvious. But there are powerful vested interests and elections to win.

This makes me think if I like policies of oppressive politicians they are benevolent dictators if not they are third world tyrants

Re: Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness

#223

Post by glass3 »

luckylion wrote: post #159
MonkeyMalarky wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quickly throwing up cheap mass housing without also organically growing the services and rest of the community is how you get food deserts and ghettos though. I'm not saying it shouldn't be done, just pointing out where it's gone wrong in the past and why people may be hesitant to try again.

It doesn't have to be "plan & build it within 12 months, and don't worry about anything but apartment buildings". It's not a new problem, it's been a constant topic (here, in Germany) for at least 15 years, with every year ending with "we have 2000 new apartments, but we need 20000 a year to keep up with demand". And city planners put their hands into their pockets and say "well, you can't rush these things..." What…

Neither. Why would significant further growth happen in Western (European) cities if cheap solar energy and space is available in North Africa?

Re: Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness

#224

Post by throwaway742 »

gremlinsinc wrote: post #143
slibhb wrote: post #53

When people talk about "homelessness," they're often referring to street people. Most technically homeless people aren't street people, they're between jobs or living in their car or something like that. It seems clear that lower rent/housing prices would help with homelessness but I don't think it would help street people.

I think if we could just help the out of sorts, hardship cases that are 'newer' homeless, or maybe classified as 'under-housed', which may include couch-surfers, car/van-lifers, etc. I mean there's levels to homelessness some of which is mental health related and such, some people actually maybe could prefer that life for reasons. There's a lot who are forced into it, and are just down on their luck. These should be…

It doesn't help that we are basically doing the opposite. In my experience you pretty much have to already be homeless to get any help. It would be nice if you didn't have to lose everything before you get assistance.

Re: Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness

#225

Post by WalterBright »

majormajor wrote: post #116
zozbot234 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, they are. What do you think "anti-gentrification activism" boils down to, in practice? Build more and drive prices down? Of course not, the activists will conveniently tell you that this makes gentrification worse ! Which totally defies economic logic: there's only so much demand in the world for places like Manhattan!

> Which totally defies economic logic: there's only so much demand in the world for places like Manhattan! How much demand "in the world" to live in Manhattan do you think there is? The more the price drops, of course, the demand will go up. So how much "in the world" at both current prices and also if, say, prices went down by 5%? 10%? 50%? 75%? I think there's enough currently-unmet demand to keep the prices from f…

> You can also increase demand by building

The solution to high housing prices, obviously, is to demolish whole blocks of housing.

Re: Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness

#226

Post by WesternWind »

dasil003 wrote: post #176
danjac wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe San Francisco is just not suitable any more? There's nothing magic about SF's geography that makes it a tech hub. It's not a mining town that needs to be next to coal or minerals, or a ski resort town that needs some mountains and snow. It's based on work that can literally be done anywhere. Hollywood, after all, was just a dusty desert town that became the hub of the movie business because it was easier to mov…

This is a questionable take on two levels. First, yes, yes there is something magic about SF's geography, it's the closest major city to the largest VC hub in the world. These companies thrive on young talent that prefers to live in a city. It's not dissimilar to the gold rush 170 years ago when you think about it. Second, what do you mean "San Francisco is just not suitable any more"? The tech companies and their em…

Just FYI, San Jose is bigger than San Francisco in terms of population and square miles.

That's not to say that SF might not be more of a major city than SJ, in fact I would say that personally I think it is in terms of culture and history and social impact, but it's at least debatable.

Re: Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness

#227

Post by throwaway742 »

johnpublic wrote: post #152

A friend of mine who recently moved to the US from the UK put it to me like this: "imagine one state says they will pay out benefits without a permanent address. Where do you think the homeless are going to move to?"

Is there any state where you can't get benefits without a permanent address or am I missing something here?

Re: Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness

#228

Post by joenot443 »

Red_Leaves_Flyy wrote: post #207
misterprime wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you count having to step over an active urine stream on your way to the grocery store as "a problem"? How about walking with your pregnant wife past someone who is splitting his time yelling at the sky and scratching his crotch from the inside of his pants? Sure, in both scenarios we weren't physically harmed, but it certainly made us feel unsafe and uncomfortable. It's not something that I think we should all…

Those are great opportunities to teach your children about the consequences of an apathetic voting base. It’s also a great time to nurture children’s empathetic abilities by teaching them to juxtapose indecent behavior, mental illness, poverty, and general despair. Want more action? Try protesting and demanding solutions that include no questions asked housing, healthcare, food, water, and basic essential communicati…

There are so many countries on earth with a far, far more apathetic voting base than San Francisco which face a fraction of the homeless issues. It’s not fair to tell regular citizens that the homeless people harassing them on their walk to work are only there because they haven’t protested hard enough, that’s just baloney.

Something’s very, very wrong in SF and it’s absolutely okay for tax paying law abiding citizens to be making noise about it.

Re: Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness

#229

Post by ejb999 »

Red_Leaves_Flyy wrote: post #207
misterprime wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you count having to step over an active urine stream on your way to the grocery store as "a problem"? How about walking with your pregnant wife past someone who is splitting his time yelling at the sky and scratching his crotch from the inside of his pants? Sure, in both scenarios we weren't physically harmed, but it certainly made us feel unsafe and uncomfortable. It's not something that I think we should all…

Those are great opportunities to teach your children about the consequences of an apathetic voting base. It’s also a great time to nurture children’s empathetic abilities by teaching them to juxtapose indecent behavior, mental illness, poverty, and general despair. Want more action? Try protesting and demanding solutions that include no questions asked housing, healthcare, food, water, and basic essential communicati…

>>Those are great opportunities to teach your children about the consequences of an apathetic voting base

I think you would be much better off using those opportunities to teach your kids to stay away from drugs and alcohol, and to study hard and work hard - so they don't end up like that.

Re: Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness

#230

Post by mindover »

jlmorton wrote: post #17

Imagine you're a municipality like San Francisco. You control all of the zoning regulations, and many of the permitting requirements. You have a AA+ credit rating, and even in today's higher rate environment, you can borrow billions of dollars at 6%. You already own oodles of land. You can build to whatever height you want within reason, because you control the zoning, and you even control many of the ordinances that…

Right - just build more housing. Forget about failing utilities, packed roads, overwhelmed social services, crowded schools! Just build more skyscrapers and move half of the country to SF so that we can all drown in shit together.

This oversimplification that we just need to build more houses is amusing. SF is a tiny city, stuffing more people here won’t resolve many of the problems that already make life here difficult. And no, it won’t lower rent by much: SF doesn’t exist in a vacuum, more people will move here and will keep rent as high as before.

Post reply on HN