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

Abundance isn't going to happen unless politicians are scared of the status quo

inpractice.yimbyaction.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 539 posts

Re: Abundance isn't going to happen unless politicians are scared of the status quo

#361

Post by jon-wood »

BrenBarn wrote: post #330
PaulHoule wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who owns a second house on a farm that has two rental units in it, I’m skeptical of attempts to expand ‘tenant rights’ in New York. I had a tenant who decided that he did not have to pay the rent, it took months of trying to reason with him, we hired a lawyer and went through the process which took several months, in the end the tenant stayed on a few months past what would have been the eviction date but…

The path forward from this is to stop trying to write laws that are wealth-neutral on these kinds of matters. Small mom-and-pop should be allowed to do many things that extremely wealthy landlords and/or corporations are not allowed to do. The penalties for violations should be ruinous for the wealthy and small for the non-wealthy.

Why? If I'm renting a place it doesn't matter whether my landlord is a big corporation or some guy and his wife, I still need to know that the rent isn't going to triple next week, I still need to know I won't be evicted without notice, and I still need the heating the work.

If mom-and-pop can't cope with the responsibilities of being a landlord they should sell up to someone who can, not expect to be let off the hook when they make someone's life a misery.

Re: Abundance isn't going to happen unless politicians are scared of the status quo

#362

Post by watwut »

dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #94
rpastuszak wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what sense?

In the sense that the center is where the action is, and votes are, and the left and right fringes attract too much attention and influence.

No, far right is where the action is. Then there is the center that eternally and constantly focuses on faults of left or of democrats and constantly excuses far right.

You have far right and then many far right enablers who will always blame the democrats and left for what conservatives do. Then you have comparatively less few pro-democracy moderate and small far left.

Re: Abundance isn't going to happen unless politicians are scared of the status quo

#363

Post by keepamovin »

I have a theory that echoes the surprising premise of the well known HN-famous article "The optimum amount of fraud is not zero" that states "The optimum amount of poverty, to governments, is not zero."

It seems to me that if governments deliver too well for their citizens, if the citizens because too wealthy, if they are too well off, then they will begin to demand even more. This would cause problems for governments, problems that also include the citizens having power and sight to realize the abundant shortcomings of their governments, and the means to do away with them for something that works "better".

So my theory is that the stable system of "liberal democracies" seeks an equilibrium position of "not too much abundance" in order to preserve itself.

Just a theory, I'm not a historian and don't know any historical smoking-guns for this - besides the experience that governments seem to not deliver excellence, even when they could, and instead focus on policies that are often surprisingly ineffective.

I don't discount incompetence, but I like to have at least one alternate theory. Moreover, incompetence is not "constructive" in that it doesn't let you actually design a solution or understand the problem. It provides no real insight. It is, therefore, the kind of explanation that governments intent of continuing to deliver under-adundance would probably want you to believe in place of what my theory proposes is the truth.

I'm sure some political-economists could comment on this - as long as they are sufficiently lacking in woke to retain their critical skills.

Re: Abundance isn't going to happen unless politicians are scared of the status quo

#364

Post by bell-cot »

ReptileMan wrote: post #81
e40 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>* There's a general fear of being a landlord. Tenants have a lot of legal rights, and the risk of inviting someone onto your property who could start squatting or doing drugs and not being able to evict them is beyond the pale for most families.* This is a big problem in a lot of places. It's really hard for cities to strike a good balance between renters and owners, and I think few do it well. Especially for the ed…

The balance simple - renters have total rights as long as they pay on time and there is no damage on the property except normal wear and tear and 0 when when not paying. You as landlord can't say anything as long as the property is not damaged for the duration of the contract. You always renegotiate at market rates. There is no concept of squatting and evictions are fast. That's it. Works like a charm. No bullshits l…

I strongly suspect that you've never been a landlord. Nor a particularly perceptive tenant in rental housing. Nor seen any police/tenant/landlord cases.

Plus, the policy goal of allowing small-scale stuff like ADU's is to encourage people to become landlords. "Your tenant has total right" rules have the opposite effect.

Re: Abundance isn't going to happen unless politicians are scared of the status quo

#365

Post by imtheopposite »

legitster wrote: post #46

I've grown a little bit more skeptical of what can realistically be achieved by the passive nature of YIMBY-ism. In Portland, they passed some radical new zoning laws a few years ago that allowed anyone, anywhere the ability to zone ADUs on their property. And the cost to get permits is almost nothing. I have lots of friends and family in the area with property. But not a single one has added an ADU. It seems like it…

[dead]

Re: Abundance isn't going to happen unless politicians are scared of the status quo

#366

Post by JuniperMesos »

jon-wood wrote: post #361
BrenBarn wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The path forward from this is to stop trying to write laws that are wealth-neutral on these kinds of matters. Small mom-and-pop should be allowed to do many things that extremely wealthy landlords and/or corporations are not allowed to do. The penalties for violations should be ruinous for the wealthy and small for the non-wealthy.

Why? If I'm renting a place it doesn't matter whether my landlord is a big corporation or some guy and his wife, I still need to know that the rent isn't going to triple next week, I still need to know I won't be evicted without notice, and I still need the heating the work. If mom-and-pop can't cope with the responsibilities of being a landlord they should sell up to someone who can, not expect to be let off the hoo…

That's exactly what the thread OP is complaining about - mom-and-pop homeowners choosing not to increase the housing supply by adding an ADU that they would rent out to someone, even though this is now legal to do, because they can't cope with the responsibilities of being a landlord.

Also, if a property did have an ADU in it, and someone was renting it out, a prospective buyer who didn't want the responsibility of being a landlord would find that a huge negative, which would decrease the value of the property to the existing owner, and provide additional incentive to avoid constructing the ADU at all.

Re: Abundance isn't going to happen unless politicians are scared of the status quo

#367

Post by Braxton1980 »

MrDarcy wrote: post #220
legitster wrote: post #46

I've grown a little bit more skeptical of what can realistically be achieved by the passive nature of YIMBY-ism. In Portland, they passed some radical new zoning laws a few years ago that allowed anyone, anywhere the ability to zone ADUs on their property. And the cost to get permits is almost nothing. I have lots of friends and family in the area with property. But not a single one has added an ADU. It seems like it…

I also live in Portland. Look into our local taxes for the answer. We have the highest local tax rate in the nation for families earning more than 200K a year, higher than Manhattan. It simply doesn't pencil to build an ADU and rent it out long term, so you’re incentivized to a short term rental like Airbnb, which does little to nothing to help the housing situation. It’s the same for new apartment buildings. Next ti…

What specific tax rates over 200k are you referring to? The SHS is 1% and the state also jumps just about 1% how is that not worth making over 200k?

Re: Abundance isn't going to happen unless politicians are scared of the status quo

#368

Post by batch12 »

PaulHoule wrote: post #88
legitster wrote: post #46

I've grown a little bit more skeptical of what can realistically be achieved by the passive nature of YIMBY-ism. In Portland, they passed some radical new zoning laws a few years ago that allowed anyone, anywhere the ability to zone ADUs on their property. And the cost to get permits is almost nothing. I have lots of friends and family in the area with property. But not a single one has added an ADU. It seems like it…

As someone who owns a second house on a farm that has two rental units in it, I’m skeptical of attempts to expand ‘tenant rights’ in New York. I had a tenant who decided that he did not have to pay the rent, it took months of trying to reason with him, we hired a lawyer and went through the process which took several months, in the end the tenant stayed on a few months past what would have been the eviction date but…

I thought about renting out property for passive income, but after speaking with a friend locally about issues hes had, changed my mind. Not worth the hassle. In the one case, the tenant stopped paying their power bill and the power company cut them off. The tenant proceeded to tear down the inside of the house and burn it for heat. The kitchen island and kitchen cabinet fronts were burned, for instance. In another instance, when cleaning out a property, he found a miscarried fetus left behind in one of the toilets. Both tenants were also evicted for not paying their rent. So yeah, not worth it.

Re: Abundance isn't going to happen unless politicians are scared of the status quo

#369

Post by Braxton1980 »

PaulHoule wrote: post #105
eddythompson80 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is what the Kamala campaign ran on, it didn’t work. It's what Obama ran on, and it worked for him. The fact that he achieved very little there is a different issue. Kamala's 2-month long campaign wasn't very convincing.

The odd trouble was that ordinary people saw the Harris campaign as being preoccupied with the issues of a lunatic fringe online plus what conservatives said Harris was preoccupied with. Harris would have had to kick the lunatic fringe to the curb but didn’t have the will to do so.

>The odd trouble was that ordinary people saw the Harris campaign as being preoccupied with the issues of a lunatic fringe online plus what conservatives said Harris was preoccupied with.

What made them think that?

Re: Abundance isn't going to happen unless politicians are scared of the status quo

#370

Post by Braxton1980 »

CivBase wrote: post #201
knowknow wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s amazing that this gets upvoted while it is completely uninformed about what liberal politicians actually run on. This is what the Kamala campaign ran on, it didn’t work. People love getting tangled on social issues as it’s the most provocative. This conception that most people actually care about rational policies is false and has been false for at least the past decade.

Is that what she ran on? My perception was that she ran on "more of the same but also different... nevermind, look at all these celebrities telling you to vote for me!" and something vague about protecting women's rights. It's almost like you need more than a couple months to run a serious presidential campaign. Despite being the VP for 4 years, most people didn't know what to expect from her. Almost nobody was enthu…

>My perception was that she ran on "more of the same but also different

But

>most people didn't know what to expect from her.

Post reply on HN