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

311–320 of 376 posts

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

#311

Post by prottog »

closeparen wrote: post #64
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> government is run by and for the benefit of the established land owners Do San Francisco’s renters fail to turn out to vote? (Serious question.)

To the extent that SF renters are organized, they're organized around groups and ideologies that don't prioritize supply a solution. They're focused on things like rent control, just cause eviction, foreign/institutional investor boogeymen, and preventing even substantially or fully below-market housing developments because they still threaten to upset what renters believe is a delicate balance their neighborhoods/co…

> They're focused on things like rent control, just cause eviction, foreign/institutional investor boogeymen, and preventing even substantially or fully below-market housing developments

Which is funny, since every single thing here makes the situation worse, because it ensures that new developments will be more expensive and riskier.

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

#312

Post by prottog »

themitigating wrote: post #301
novok wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you a large tall white man by any chance?

I'm a white man but I don't see how that matters. If I was Black would be more likely to be assaulted for some reason? Do homeless people avoid assaulting white people? I get that you implying that I would feel safer because I'm less likely to be sexually assaulted and that I have a greater chance to defend myself. However, that doesn't prevent me from criticizing other's feelings. It's like a someone who is racist s…

Why do you capitalize black and not white?

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

#313

Post by prottog »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #298
HDThoreaun wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LVT now. Truly the solution to all our economic problems.

If it was that simple someone would have done it recently. LVT would cure places like SF where there's huge land values and pent up demand, sure. But it also creates a huge incentive to block development on a town level to keep taxes low.

LVT is economically simple, just politically impossible, especially at a scale that would make a big difference (i.e. replacing income tax with land value tax).

> But it also creates a huge incentive to block development on a town level to keep taxes low.

Wouldn't the town as a government entity be incentivized to foster development to raise tax revenue? The only people who I could see might have an incentive against development is property owners in parcels near the ones being developed, since their land value and therefore taxes will go up; but usually those same people will benefit from the additional economic activity that comes from development, so I'm not convinced.

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

#314

Post by pwinnski »

WalterBright wrote: post #234
pwinnski wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a popular trope, but companies have already begun walking back their claims of rampant theft[0]. There are increased profits when building in more prosperous areas, so one might understand why companies choose to do so given limited resources. But lower profits in inner cities are not always about theft so much as a lack of cash. 0. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/walgreens-may-have-cried-t...

That isn't what the article says. It says Walgreens is walking back their anti-theft measures because it's costly and ineffective and the customers don't like them.

It also says that they sounded the alarm when shrink was at 3.5%, but they're back down to the more-normal 2.5% now. That's a decline that undercuts the very-popular trope that open theft is rampant or out of control in certain cites.

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

#316

Post by maeil »

MonkeyMalarky wrote: post #112
luckylion wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially for a city that is explicitly progressive, why the "all rapid change is bad, it must take decades or centuries, otherwise it's not natural" approach? Germany's large cities have similar issues where they don't want to start building new districts because it'd be artificial and not naturally grown building by building. And it's better to have rents double every 10 years, apparently. I don't get the "why", b…

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.

Here in Korea quick building of mass housing is incredibly common yet there's not a single food desert or ghetto to be found. "Quick" and "cheap" are relative terms but here apartment blocks of 1k+ residencies are built in ~4 years. While most aren't "cheap" as they're built for families, those for 1 or 2-person households are very cheap by e.g. Western-European capital standards.

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

#317

Post by googlryas »

wolverine876 wrote: post #164
googlryas wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every self preservation instinct is something each person is ultimately responsible for, but that doesn't mean that is the only dial that can be adjusted to solve the issue. Some people really do worry too much. Some areas really could be cleaned up so that random people feel comfortable moving through them without threat of assault.

> Some areas really could be cleaned up Cleaned? People who are homeless are dirt?

When you clean up your house, you might put everything back in a good place designed for it. For example, people in homes. If I were being as ridiculous as you, I would say you must not believe in people having homes.

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

#318

Post by [deleted] »

prottog wrote: post #312
themitigating wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a white man but I don't see how that matters. If I was Black would be more likely to be assaulted for some reason? Do homeless people avoid assaulting white people? I get that you implying that I would feel safer because I'm less likely to be sexually assaulted and that I have a greater chance to defend myself. However, that doesn't prevent me from criticizing other's feelings. It's like a someone who is racist s…

Why do you capitalize black and not white?

[deleted]

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

#319

Post by WalterBright »

pwinnski wrote: post #314
WalterBright wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That isn't what the article says. It says Walgreens is walking back their anti-theft measures because it's costly and ineffective and the customers don't like them.

It also says that they sounded the alarm when shrink was at 3.5%, but they're back down to the more-normal 2.5% now. That's a decline that undercuts the very-popular trope that open theft is rampant or out of control in certain cites.

Their anti-theft measures brought it to 2.5%. They also closed several stores due to unsustainable theft. The 2.5% was overall, not each store.

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

#320

Post by prottog »

shanty wrote: post #283
woah wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a bizarrely complicated argument to try to refute the most basic law of supply and demand. Many economists have proven over and over that building more housing means that there are more places for people to live. The burden of proof is on you, since you are the one making outlandish claims. The number of "underutilized properties" is likely a few percent in your area. "Most condos are empty and owned by foreigne…

From a supply and demand side, Real Estate Developers would gravitate to high value developments due to potential for making higher returns as well as the prestige in building "fancier" developments.

A glut in the supply of high value developments would lower the market price of existing lower value stock, as well. Plus, in a lot of places developers are forced to focus on "luxury" housing because their margins are hamstrung by affordable unit requirements; so instead of putting up a building that's 100% medium rate, they build something with 70% luxury units to offset the 30% affordable units.
Post reply on HN