Goodbye, New York, California and Illinois – Hello where? • Hacker News Board

Re: Goodbye, New York, California and Illinois – Hello where?

#561

Post by jelliclesfarm » Sat, Jan 18, 2020, 6:17 AM UTC

inferiorhuman wrote: post #544

jelliclesfarm wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you speaking for all of them? I am unclear about what you said about ‘undue costs onto new property developments’. Why should existing home owners share the cost of new developments?? What are these ‘undue costs’? The development company buys land or old property and builds on it. Then they sell it at a profit. They pay fees to the city for digging trenches and fixing sewers and water and gas and electricity conn…

I started skimming your reply and, well, you had me at virtue signalling. Buh bye.

it is fast becoming my favourite word to describe something that I had never been able to put my finger on..and actually identify the intention behind certain strings of words.

Thanks for making it clearer again.

Re: Goodbye, New York, California and Illinois – Hello where?

#562

Post by TulliusCicero » Sat, Jan 18, 2020, 6:17 AM UTC

roenxi wrote: post #476

mint2 wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to have a lot of judging and questionable assumptions in your post.

There is a very pronounced trend of people migrating away from states that are controlled by Democrats for reasons that are potentially ideologically driven policy failures. This raises a a very real and material question for the new host community - do the migrants understand why the situation became so intolerable that they felt they should move? Migrants bring new ideas so a certain amount of discomfort and change…

> do the migrants understand why the situation became so intolerable that they felt they should move?

For California, it's mostly having a very successful economy combined with terribly stupid housing policy.

Conservative areas are 'better' on the latter on some level because they permit more sprawl, which does provide for more supply, which means lower housing prices. Car-dominant sprawl is a disaster in other ways, though: environment, pollution, health, noise, danger, cost to government, cost to user, etc.

And conservative areas are usually even worse at allowing density, despite being ostensibly free market. I have a lot of conservative FB friends, and it's always amazing how quickly they're suddenly in favor of strict government regulation when it's for keeping housing density low; when it's their favored lifestyle at risk, free market principles are apparently no longer an issue.

Re: Goodbye, New York, California and Illinois – Hello where?

#563

Post by manquer » Sat, Jan 18, 2020, 6:17 AM UTC

gfxgirl wrote: post #536

tjr225 wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Statistically, people are moving from rural areas and to urban areas. Rural areas tend to be conservative and economically depressed. Urban areas tend to have high paying jobs and be liberal or progressive. Aside from a few state/city couplings(Omaha, NE comes to mind) a US "State" is a poor indicator of differentiated policy or ideology. People in Atlanta or Miami or LA or Seattle have a lot more in common with each…

plenty of the most populous areas in the world are not liberal and progressive. There are at least 20 cities in China larger than NYC. I'm sure India has it's share. So does the middle East and south East Asia. Let's not make assumptions based only on majority populations of European descent.

It is on a relative spectrum what’s left and right in those countries . In Europe for example the U.S. left would be considered moderate or conservative and not really liberal. Also the reason for urban areas being more liberal , is usually because closer you live to ton of people , better you need and appreciate collective/ liberal policies better

Re: Goodbye, New York, California and Illinois – Hello where?

#564

Post by TulliusCicero » Sat, Jan 18, 2020, 6:19 AM UTC

gfxgirl wrote: post #536

tjr225 wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Statistically, people are moving from rural areas and to urban areas. Rural areas tend to be conservative and economically depressed. Urban areas tend to have high paying jobs and be liberal or progressive. Aside from a few state/city couplings(Omaha, NE comes to mind) a US "State" is a poor indicator of differentiated policy or ideology. People in Atlanta or Miami or LA or Seattle have a lot more in common with each…

plenty of the most populous areas in the world are not liberal and progressive. There are at least 20 cities in China larger than NYC. I'm sure India has it's share. So does the middle East and south East Asia. Let's not make assumptions based only on majority populations of European descent.

Within those countries, you're still going to see more conservatism in rural areas, and more progressiveness in urban ones.

Re: Goodbye, New York, California and Illinois – Hello where?

#565

Post by blatant » Sat, Jan 18, 2020, 6:19 AM UTC

gfxgirl wrote: post #536

tjr225 wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Statistically, people are moving from rural areas and to urban areas. Rural areas tend to be conservative and economically depressed. Urban areas tend to have high paying jobs and be liberal or progressive. Aside from a few state/city couplings(Omaha, NE comes to mind) a US "State" is a poor indicator of differentiated policy or ideology. People in Atlanta or Miami or LA or Seattle have a lot more in common with each…

plenty of the most populous areas in the world are not liberal and progressive. There are at least 20 cities in China larger than NYC. I'm sure India has it's share. So does the middle East and south East Asia. Let's not make assumptions based only on majority populations of European descent.

And they are all significantly more "liberal" than the surrounding rural areas, even if in absolute terms they are not as liberal as Western cities.

Re: Goodbye, New York, California and Illinois – Hello where?

#566

Post by manquer » Sat, Jan 18, 2020, 6:22 AM UTC

Reedx wrote: post #548

nradov wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California has largely become a single party state. I'm not trying to start an argument between Democrats and Republicans here, but we can clearly see a pattern everywhere in the world. Once single party rule is institutionalized the politicians are no longer accountable to voter interests.

It's like having a monopoly and not having to compete. Really you want both sides to be strong and for there to be a healthy push and pull. So the best ideas from each rise to the top and then do battle via good faith debate. With the ability and willingness to steelman each other's arguments. Instead what we tend to see is an eagerness to interpret everything in the worst way possible, attacking strawmen and talking…

Ideally, you want more than two sides , there are nuances to everyone’s beliefs, forcing them to choose just red/blue is reducing choices and doesn’t reflect real preferences

Re: Goodbye, New York, California and Illinois – Hello where?

#567

Post by xyzzyz » Sat, Jan 18, 2020, 6:23 AM UTC

andrewprock wrote: post #530

xyzzyz wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-so_story Humans are really good at crafting narratives explaining complex and uncertain reality. However, just because something sounds superficialy plausible, doesn't mean it is true: it is usually easy to craft an alternative theory, just as plausible as the one at hand. For example, the narrative of Prop 13 being the root of all California's housing problem very much depends on e…

The issue has been studied extensively. There is plenty of stuff available out there if you go look.

Yes, and I haven’t seen anything suggesting that it’s Prop 13 that’s responsible for majority of the premium in California’s housing costs compared to other states. It’s not nothing, but it pales in comparison to zoning regulations and requirements for environmental traffic etc impact studies that drag on and on.

Re: Goodbye, New York, California and Illinois – Hello where?

#568

Post by viscanti » Sat, Jan 18, 2020, 6:25 AM UTC

roenxi wrote: post #476

mint2 wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to have a lot of judging and questionable assumptions in your post.

There is a very pronounced trend of people migrating away from states that are controlled by Democrats for reasons that are potentially ideologically driven policy failures. This raises a a very real and material question for the new host community - do the migrants understand why the situation became so intolerable that they felt they should move? Migrants bring new ideas so a certain amount of discomfort and change…

No one lives in the overcrowded costal states anymore. They're too overcrowded.

Re: Goodbye, New York, California and Illinois – Hello where?

#569

Post by TulliusCicero » Sat, Jan 18, 2020, 6:25 AM UTC

kls wrote: post #513

tjr225 wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Statistically, people are moving from rural areas and to urban areas. Rural areas tend to be conservative and economically depressed. Urban areas tend to have high paying jobs and be liberal or progressive. Aside from a few state/city couplings(Omaha, NE comes to mind) a US "State" is a poor indicator of differentiated policy or ideology. People in Atlanta or Miami or LA or Seattle have a lot more in common with each…

Up until recently Dallas / Ft. Worth and Miami where conservative. The Cubans that fled communism held Miami as a conservative metro up until about 15-20 years ago. Orlando and Tampa where the same. Orlando for different reasons but Tampa was largely due to the conservative Cubans as well. Texas and Florida are two of the states that are experiencing meteoric growth and to imply that those moving in are not shifting…

The biggest thing in those states' favor is easily housing policy. They tend to permit much more sprawl, so housing prices in general, and especially the cost of a detached single family home stay more reasonable. Aside from Houston, they're still not great on allowing housing density though.

Meanwhile, blue states have a "worst of both worlds" kind of policy. They don't permit much sprawl, and also don't permit much density, thereby pushing people to states where they do permit sprawl. Then they tell you that this is good for the environment, somehow.

That said, while it makes for cheap single family homes, sprawl has a LOT of negatives. Strong Towns explains how it basically functions like a Ponzi scheme in the long term, and within older cities the sprawlier parts are usually subsidized by the denser ones. There's also more cost to the environment, to health, to noise, to safety, and for transportation costs for both the government and the user. There's a reason the US has an unusually high traffic fatality rate per 100k people for a developed country, and there's an impact on our collective national waistline as well.

Re: Goodbye, New York, California and Illinois – Hello where?

#570

Post by generatorguy » Sat, Jan 18, 2020, 6:33 AM UTC

leppr wrote: post #541

tmh79 wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Strong disagree, the solution to affordable housing includes a very large amount of private/free market housing, but the free market won't really address the needs of people below 30% of the median income. Additionally, good affordable housing is one of the best anti poverty tools that we have. IMO the long term solution is robust private market housing construction for the middle class, and a robust public housing c…

> the free market won't really address the needs of people below 30% of the median income. Why? Do you think a poor person's vote is worth more to the government than their wallet would be to a house builder? Is it impossible to make an acceptable house at 30% the cost of a median earner's house? Your reasoning is valid for people whose productivity approaches zero, in which case welfare can indeed be needed. But the…

Imagine you are a property developer. You borrow money to buy land and want to build as many housing units on that land as you are allowed to and sell them for as much as you can. Buying granite counter tops in bulk and selling the housing units as luxury is going to make you a lot more than trying to cater to the bottom of the market, so nobody does, unless forced.