Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness • Hacker News Board

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

#351

Post by jjav » Sat, Jan 07, 2023, 4:52 PM UTC

fxleach wrote: post #239

ejb999 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>This is why higher orders of government need to step in to "force" municipalities to enact some of these sorts of policy changes you describe. The people that live there, don't want their city/neighborhood to change in a certain way, so people that don't live there should force them to do it? Why are people that aren't even voters in that location have a say at all?

It's not "their" city/neighbourhood. It existed before them and it will exist after. What gives someone a right to move in and create laws to make it harder for other people to do the same thing they did? I understand they actually have that right, it's just shitty to have that kind of mindset.

> What gives someone a right to move in and create laws to make it harder for other people to do the same thing they did?

Conversely, what gives a right to people who don't even live somewhere to go pass laws in that place so that those who have made their life there can no longer afford to stay and need to get kicked out so that the newcomers can take their place?

Either of these is too extreme, there needs to be some reasonable middle ground. But arguing that outsiders with no connection to a city other than the wish to live there someday are allowed to make laws to get rid of the locals, that doesn't sound right.

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

#352

Post by Red_Leaves_Flyy » Sat, Jan 07, 2023, 4:54 PM UTC

joenot443 wrote: post #228

Red_Leaves_Flyy wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 citizen…

You may misunderstand me. I’m not saying tax payers are at fault for not protesting hard enough. What I am saying is that Direct Action is required to force the hands of people who have the authority make the direly needed changes.

I’m not interested in quibbling about how the homeless population grew so large unless it is explicitly for the purposes of calculating reparations and identifying perpetrators.

Make all the noise you want, complaining about people peeing is ineffective. I see trust fund brats pissing in public regularly and have never seen this volume of outrage directed at this population of people. More public bathrooms is the solution to that particular problem.

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

#353

Post by jjav » Sat, Jan 07, 2023, 4:59 PM UTC

thebradbain wrote: post #103

ROTMetro wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, just average people, who built the community over time into something desirable, that were promised with zoning laws that it would be the type of community (single family homes, etc) that they wanted, and that then dedicated the majority of their lifetime earning power to purchase a home there. There are how many acres of land in this country? Why do you have a right to overrule the will of people in one comparat…

No one in San Francisco today built it to what it is. That city hasn’t changed in any substantial way since before 1960. It’s long been coasting off its past success.

> No one in San Francisco today built it to what it is. That city hasn’t changed in any substantial way since before 1960.

SF has changed quite substantially just from the late 90s which is the time I've been around the area.

If you find some 60s hippies to interview they'll recount even more change from those decades.

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

#354

Post by jjav » Sat, Jan 07, 2023, 5:02 PM UTC

CogitoCogito wrote: post #118

nradov wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are welcome to put a repeal of Proposition 13 on the next ballot. All it takes is a $2000 fee and some signed petitions. https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ballot-measures/how-qualify...

Frankly that's a waste of time. People are are all too happy not paying their fair share of taxes and will fight hard to preserve that inequity. The clearly correct approach is for the state to continue its current path of overruling local zoning ordinances and to allow increases in density against the will of local homeowners.

> The clearly correct approach is for the state to continue its current path of overruling local zoning ordinances and to allow increases in density against the will of local homeowners.

That's a very radical statement. In your view, the role of the state is to go against the wishes of people who actually live there? To satify whom? People who are not citizens of the state who might later move in if things change?

What if the state angers the locals to leave and the outsiders who instigated the change decide not to move in after all?

Can you document historical cases of cities and states which thrived on such an approach?

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

#355

Post by jjav » Sat, Jan 07, 2023, 5:06 PM UTC

novok wrote: post #151

AaronM wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if they could make sweeping changes, the local homeowners would drag those new developments to court for 25 years

The BoS & electorate create laws, bureaucracies, structures and courts that would create those 25 year court cases in the first place. The properly allocated elected set of judges, supervisors, mayor and DAs can make most of those disappear in the first place by changing the law, how the government runs and how the courts run and rule on cases, complete with prioritizing court cases for the few they don't have a choi…

> The BoS & electorate create laws, bureaucracies, structures and courts that would create those 25 year court cases in the first place. The properly allocated elected set of judges, supervisors, mayor and DAs can make most of those disappear in the first place by changing the law, how the government runs and how the courts run and rule on cases, complete with prioritizing court cases for the few they don't have a choice in getting rid of to make them get through the system quickly.

Let's say they do that. All the branches of SF government collude to make or remove laws as needed to eliminate all obstacles to permenently buidling more.

Who will be satisfied? What would happen to the city as everyone flees such authoritarian approach?

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

#356

Post by nswest23 » Sat, Jan 07, 2023, 5:33 PM UTC

georgeecollins wrote: post #220

wolverine876 wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's nothing magic about SF's geography It includes two of the world's top ten universities, incredible natural beauty there and nearby, excellent weather (locals complain, as locals do, but it's wonderful), and all the resources and people are gathered there. It's hard to imagine the return on investment of moving.

It's also a place that is relatively welcoming to people from almost any part of the world. It's not perfect (no where is) but there a lot of places in the US where if you came from another continent or practiced an unusual religion you would feel more uncomfortable then you would in SF. That's a quality it has possessed for decades, for historical reasons.

> relatively welcoming to people from almost any part of the world.

The US has an __abundance__ of places that fit this description.

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

#357

Post by mindover » Sat, Jan 07, 2023, 6:37 PM UTC

pzone wrote: post #332

mindover wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 diffic…

You just have to look at Tokyo and Taipei. It is possible for cities to grow without soaring rents as long as you build lots of housing for everyone. We’re not just talking about the tiny San Francisco city proper, we’re talking about the whole Bay Area, as well as the rest of the state. You’re right that fixing housing won’t fix everything, but more problems than you think are caused by high housing prices, particul…

But... San Franciscans don't want to live in a city like Tokyo or Taipei. Who would benefit from this changing city with taller buildings? Not many San Franciscans want that, so newcomers? I am not convinced either. People love the Bay and move here because of what it is, not because of what it is not. The complaints that I am hearing most often are about public transport, crime, street cleaning, social services. Not about having small buildings in SF.

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

#358

Post by beaned » Sat, Jan 07, 2023, 6:39 PM UTC

emptysongglass wrote: post #321

dionidium wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the thing I always say about the people who complain about tech workers and gentrification in a place like San Francisco is like, look, if you can't figure out how to gain from an influx of wealthy, highly-educated, low-criminality, nerdy tech workers, then that's really on you. What a gift! Any city would be lucky to have that "problem." You have to actively work to make that a negative (by, say, refusing to a…

I didn't want the tech workers flowing into Seattle with Amazon's decision to invade by building their HQ right in the heart. There was a lot of music culture there, at Cap Hill, in the basements of Seattle families that had lived there a long time. It really felt, if you were there, like an invasion: nobody coming in had any context of what was already there, they just took and took and all they could offer was soft…

When a company creates a new HQ, it's displacement. When a company leaves a town (especially a small one) it leaves people jobless and they are evil for it. On the surface it seems some people think cities should stay entirely static forever, frozen at the particular time when they remembered they enjoyed it most.

The people moving in will have their own experiences. Places change. If you don't like your place, work to make it better or find one you like more. Maybe not everyone in your city is into the arts and "scene" as much as you are, and the changes are a net benefit to them.

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

#359

Post by thepasswordis » Sat, Jan 07, 2023, 7:58 PM UTC

nswest23 wrote: post #356

georgeecollins wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also a place that is relatively welcoming to people from almost any part of the world. It's not perfect (no where is) but there a lot of places in the US where if you came from another continent or practiced an unusual religion you would feel more uncomfortable then you would in SF. That's a quality it has possessed for decades, for historical reasons.

> relatively welcoming to people from almost any part of the world. The US has an __abundance__ of places that fit this description.

I'm trying to think of a major metropolitan area in The US which wouldn't fit this description.

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

#360

Post by emptysongglass » Sat, Jan 07, 2023, 8:21 PM UTC

beaned wrote: post #358

emptysongglass wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't want the tech workers flowing into Seattle with Amazon's decision to invade by building their HQ right in the heart. There was a lot of music culture there, at Cap Hill, in the basements of Seattle families that had lived there a long time. It really felt, if you were there, like an invasion: nobody coming in had any context of what was already there, they just took and took and all they could offer was soft…

When a company creates a new HQ, it's displacement. When a company leaves a town (especially a small one) it leaves people jobless and they are evil for it. On the surface it seems some people think cities should stay entirely static forever, frozen at the particular time when they remembered they enjoyed it most. The people moving in will have their own experiences. Places change. If you don't like your place, work…

> On the surface it seems some people think cities should stay entirely static forever, frozen at the particular time when they remembered they enjoyed it most.

I didn't say this.

> The people moving in will have their own experiences. Places change. If you don't like your place, work to make it better or find one you like more. Maybe not everyone in your city is into the arts and "scene" as much as you are, and the changes are a net benefit to them.

The tech people moving in make no effort to learn what the city is about or to integrate. That's really what I'm taking a stand on. They use money in lieu of real effort. That's pillaging.

The root of the problem is big corporations aren't held responsible for the seismic shockwaves they produce entering a city. They make cities fragile because now you've replaced a diverse set of businesses with a monocropping of tech workers and overpriced goods and services to sate them.

I'm talking about good stewardship.