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

Data show rich cities are failing the Bay Area on housing

goldenstatswarrior.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 76 posts

Re: Data show rich cities are failing the Bay Area on housing

#41

Post by ndiscussion »

onethought wrote: post #25
d1zzy wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But at the same time, these cities, like Palo Alto, are building office space left and right and welcoming businesses into town. Because said cities cannot get enough tax money from property tax (blame Prop 13) so they need to get it from businesses. But then those businesses attract people in the area and then those people need a place to live in but they can't get a place because nobody has the incentive to sell…

As someone not familiar with Californian/SF local legal matters. What do they need the tax $ for if there aren't many residence?

Most likely they chronically overspend, just like any other organization with chronic budget issues. The people there seem to think that everything comes for free, and as long as the city can secure additional debt, they're right.

But it's not sustainable, and imo, downright evil.

Re: Data show rich cities are failing the Bay Area on housing

#42

Post by treeman79 »

onethought wrote: post #25
d1zzy wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But at the same time, these cities, like Palo Alto, are building office space left and right and welcoming businesses into town. Because said cities cannot get enough tax money from property tax (blame Prop 13) so they need to get it from businesses. But then those businesses attract people in the area and then those people need a place to live in but they can't get a place because nobody has the incentive to sell…

As someone not familiar with Californian/SF local legal matters. What do they need the tax $ for if there aren't many residence?

Spending. Endless spending.

There is no amount of money that is enough.

Not spending fast enough? Maybe a high speed train would solve things!

Grew up there. Been traveling country since. Shocking how well states do with a lot less money.

Re: Data show rich cities are failing the Bay Area on housing

#43

Post by jseliger »

LordFast wrote: post #24

> The data show that middle income cities have, on average, grown at a much faster pace than the region’s poorest and richest locales. I'm not a housing expert, so take everything I say with a grain of salt. Middle income cities grow faster because there was more growth in middle income demographics. The most common demographic with a lot of growth is the "senior software engineer" at tech company X. As tech companie…

There's no getting around it: wherever most of the people are will be the most competitive for housing, and when it comes to essentials like food and shelter, people /will/ compete

That's not true at all: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16704501

We know how to build as much housing as people want to live in. We make building said housing illegal.

Re: Data show rich cities are failing the Bay Area on housing

#44

Post by km3r »

ndiscussion wrote: post #35
supernova87a wrote: post #31

Well, I think you have 2 factors colliding together. 1) As people moved here and got good jobs, made a life for themselves, they (you and I) inevitably become more sympathetic to and desiring of middle class values. Stability, some measure of comfort, concern about taxation, their local neighborhood. It's understandable, it's natural. Yet this is in conflict (especially when growth needs to happen) with: 2) The peopl…

I think your analysis is spot-on. Those existing NIMBY's bought their house with an expectation, and they vote accordingly. I don't think there's really a way forward without torching rule of law. They don't want the place to be amenable to new/young people, and they make the rules. It's unfortunate that big tech decided to make this place their home, perhaps with covid and remote work it will go back to a dreamy boo…

These selfish NIMBY assholes have been borrowing from their cities future as they both condemn newcomers, tax them extra (prop 13), refuse to build new housing for them, and then profit off the induced housing demand.

Re: Data show rich cities are failing the Bay Area on housing

#45

Post by Jommi »

joe_the_user wrote: post #14

I'd classify myself as a progressive and I don't see why every Bay Area city has to make some "contribution" to increased housing. An acceptable approach would seem to be to have the "center" becoming more dense over time while the outer rings stay less dense. The problem is that current geography has resulted in natural centers being the ones that refuse to build and that is problematic. Palo Alto and the rest are h…

The issue is that these same cities are constantly increasing their office space capacity, e.g. trying to have the cake and eat it too.

Re: Data show rich cities are failing the Bay Area on housing

#46

Post by ndiscussion »

davidw wrote: post #39
ndiscussion wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your analysis is spot-on. Those existing NIMBY's bought their house with an expectation, and they vote accordingly. I don't think there's really a way forward without torching rule of law. They don't want the place to be amenable to new/young people, and they make the rules. It's unfortunate that big tech decided to make this place their home, perhaps with covid and remote work it will go back to a dreamy boo…

The way forward is not to 'torch the rule of law'. There are plenty of ways to do things. Oregon just passed a housing law (HB 2001) that re-legalizes "missing middle" housing for instance, by right, in all our cities. In other words, you take some of the zoning control away from hyper-NIMBY local jurisdictions.

So "torch the will of local citizens" instead? Why should the rest of the state get to decide what they do in their neighborhoods?

As long as you agree with the majority of the state, it works out for you, but it's a bold power grab that may not end well in other situations.

Re: Data show rich cities are failing the Bay Area on housing

#47

Post by satya71 »

supernova87a wrote: post #31

Well, I think you have 2 factors colliding together. 1) As people moved here and got good jobs, made a life for themselves, they (you and I) inevitably become more sympathetic to and desiring of middle class values. Stability, some measure of comfort, concern about taxation, their local neighborhood. It's understandable, it's natural. Yet this is in conflict (especially when growth needs to happen) with: 2) The peopl…

> The people who have not yet moved here (or become voters, or homeowners in particular), don't get to have a say in the policies that govern a place, yet at some point are the ones who have to live within policies that others decide.

Same story for global warming. The current developed nations got rich (and still getting richer) by burning fossil fuels. But the ones that are trying to grow now are stuck.

Four options: 1. We’re doomed and stuck where we are, 2. Power struggle, 3. New tech provides an out, 4. Voluntary improvement via negotiation.

I’m hoping 3 and 4 work fast.

Re: Data show rich cities are failing the Bay Area on housing

#48

Post by davidw »

treeman79 wrote: post #33
hilbertseries wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even more surprising we tried to repeal prop 13 for just commercial real estate last election and it failed.

Perhaps taxes are too high?

There are ways to do revenue neutral tax changes, where you raise one and lower another one somewhere else, at the same time.

Re: Data show rich cities are failing the Bay Area on housing

#49

Post by ndiscussion »

ralph84 wrote: post #7

> Rich communities should want to welcome more residents, particularly those less fortunate than them. Sadly, in the Bay Area, that doesn’t seem to be the case. Is that the case anywhere in the world? Why single out the Bay Area.

Because the residents are Bad(tm) and need to be punished.

These standards only seem to apply to America and Europe.

Does anyone have a counterexample outside of America or Europe where the underclass is allowed to live side-by-side with the rich? I've never heard of one but perhaps I'm ignorant. Most countries seem dead-set on rejecting any and all immigrants that don't bring $500k+ along with them.

Re: Data show rich cities are failing the Bay Area on housing

#50

Post by ericd »

treeman79 wrote: post #33
hilbertseries wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even more surprising we tried to repeal prop 13 for just commercial real estate last election and it failed.

Perhaps taxes are too high?

Maybe, I'm guessing a prop 13 repeal attached to a corresponding reduction in income tax to make it revenue-neutral would have a better time passing.
Post reply on HN