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

71–80 of 539 posts

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

#71

Post by georgeecollins »

avidiax wrote: post #9

I think the author has it quite backwards, at least as it comes to housing. Politicians are beholden to the members of their district, not would-be members. Sure, more affordable housing would benefit many people, but it wouldn't benefit the members of the district, particularly the wealthy and powerful, since more affordable housing is very nearly equivalent to real estate values decreasing (at the very least, as pe…

The problem is the "pulling up the ladder" phenomena which seems to plague the US. My ancestors were allowed to come here and that was good but it would be better for me today if we stopped letting people come to the US. My house was affordable for me but it would be better for my wealth if housing in my neighborhood became unaffordable. In California Prop 13 limits taxes of long time property holders and businesses at the expense of new entrants.

That thinking works if you don't feel any obligation to the future or society, which has been the direction of US consumer / libertarian culture for decades. The impacts are obvious. The public school I went to now has to bus students in from different neighborhoods because the housing is so expensive few young families can afford to live their. It's become for wealthy people aging in place and people all over the US and the world investing in real estate.

It's also a culture of fear, for the young and the old. People are scared and they worry, but they are blind to how much they really have. For the young they worry about not being able to afford a car and a house in their thirties. This was never really possible for everyone, and when it was the houses and the cars were so much less than we would consider normal today. It's a feeling that the present that you know well isn't as good as a rose colored past.

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

#72

Post by TexanFeller »

knowknow wrote: post #47
dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #4

Instead of getting tangled up in social issues, liberal politicians should be prioritizing housing, infrastructure and government services supporting people's economic activity of all kinds. Delivering better lives for people, and having the courage to stand up to vested interests, from house owners to corporations, would create a huge and lasting political win across a broad section of the electorate.

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.

Because people have memory that lasts longer than a goldfish’s. People remember the DNC and its politicians hyperfocusing on controversial social issues for the last decade to the exclusion of everything else. They remember Kamala’s fringe and cringe positions and statements from her California and 2019 campaigns and don’t believe she’s a proud gun owning moderate that just wants to make government work for us. Bonus, she couldn’t think of anything she would do differently than Biden when asked in an interview, tanking her perception as a leader.

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

#73

Post by anon7000 »

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…

It’s more about long term, but I see what you mean about lighting a fire under butts.

One of the most eye opening discoveries for me on my urbanism journey is how Amsterdam got better. It wasn’t always a bicycle paradise; its city center had massive parking lots, huge roads, and a poor pedestrian environment.

But today it’s much different — because policies were enacted decades ago which ensure roads are re-configured when it’s time to replace them. So over time, the city has become better.

These long-term policies are deeply important. We didn’t get into the current situation because someone woke up and decided housing scarcity would be cool. It happened after decades of planning and building under policies which seemed like the future 60 years ago, but have become unsustainable. Parking minimums don’t instantly turn your town into a parking lot — it takes decades as buildings are replaced and more and more land is carved out for parking.

So yes, YIMBY doesn’t instantly solve the crisis, and we need to do more. But over time, as houses and lots sell, people remodel and build, the financial incentive to make more housing units available is very strong —- so over many years, things will definitely densify.

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

#74

Post by tsimionescu »

wwweston wrote: post #29
dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #4

Instead of getting tangled up in social issues, liberal politicians should be prioritizing housing, infrastructure and government services supporting people's economic activity of all kinds. Delivering better lives for people, and having the courage to stand up to vested interests, from house owners to corporations, would create a huge and lasting political win across a broad section of the electorate.

That's pretty much where liberal politicians end up targeting most of their policymaking and even a sizable portion of their campaign platform (as demonstrated in the Harris platform). Yet "tangled up in social issues" remains a popular misconception. Why?

This is entirely false. Centrist liberal politicians in general, and Kamala in particular, promote the idea that everyone is already doing great, and just doing what we're already doing is good enough. There were no major programs or overhaul of existing new programs of any kind in the Harris campaign. There were some ideas that Waltz floated initially, but he was quickly quieted down in favor of the pro status quo message.

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

#75

Post by dkjaudyeqooe »

knowknow wrote: post #47
dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #4

Instead of getting tangled up in social issues, liberal politicians should be prioritizing housing, infrastructure and government services supporting people's economic activity of all kinds. Delivering better lives for people, and having the courage to stand up to vested interests, from house owners to corporations, would create a huge and lasting political win across a broad section of the electorate.

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.

Your assumptions are wrong. Kamala lost because of inflation during the Biden admin and some related missteps. Also her gender and skin color likely worked against her.

Also you're misreading my point, campaigning on these things isn't a panacea, but delivering on them just might be.

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

#76

Post by pclmulqdq »

mullingitover wrote: post #63
dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #4

Instead of getting tangled up in social issues, liberal politicians should be prioritizing housing, infrastructure and government services supporting people's economic activity of all kinds. Delivering better lives for people, and having the courage to stand up to vested interests, from house owners to corporations, would create a huge and lasting political win across a broad section of the electorate.

> Instead of getting tangled up in social issues It's not that they're getting 'tangled up', it's that reactionary activists (whose ultimate goal is repealing the Civil Rights Act entirely) use strawman social issues as a wedge and the press is led around by the nose parroting these controversies that are brazenly ginned up. Liberal politicians don't really have a great strategy for this because the majority of media…

There is a fringe wing of the democrat party that loves social issues and is an outsized fraction of the "community organizing" base they use to do things like canvassing and other forms of volunteering. These people need politicians to at least prove their "purity" on social issues, even on issues that are very unpopular.

This is analogous to the hyper-religious wing of the republican party. They also like to get involved and volunteer, but they demand a certain stance on social issues, too.

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

#77

Post by knowknow »

tsimionescu wrote: post #67
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.

Where exactly did you get the idea that Kamala was running on this? Where was she advocating for, say, Medicare for all? Or fighting vested interests by running on campaign finance reform, to get money out of politics? She was running on an abstract, classical centrist non-program of "we've done great under Biden and we're going to keep doing the same". That is the exact opposite of what GP was suggesting.

The comment is saying that liberal politicians should be

>prioritizing housing, infrastructure and government services supporting people's economic activity of all kinds.

Nothing about what you mentioned at all. Nor did I ever claim Kamala ran on what you said. The fact that you and the commenter have different ideas of what rational policies are and assume politicians should be running on that platform is part of the bias. You assume that most people want the same thing as you but most people don’t. The majority actually enjoy social issues.

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

#78

Post by NullPrefix »

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…

what are ADUs?

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

#79

Post by crooked-v »

CabSauce wrote: post #62

These two gentlemen have been making the rounds on late night and political shows. They seem nice enough and I appreciate their efforts. However, I haven't heard them suggest a single functional/practical change to move toward "abundance". We have to overturn Citizens United and get unlimited corporate money out of politics. This is far and away the most important barrier to having a government that works for people.

Overturning Citizens United would do very little for housing in the US, because the housing crisis is the result of every major US city simultaneously but individually punching themselves in the face with zoning and regulations. The only way out of that is to motivate people to act at the local level.

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

#80

Post by xboxnolifes »

knowknow wrote: post #47
dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #4

Instead of getting tangled up in social issues, liberal politicians should be prioritizing housing, infrastructure and government services supporting people's economic activity of all kinds. Delivering better lives for people, and having the courage to stand up to vested interests, from house owners to corporations, would create a huge and lasting political win across a broad section of the electorate.

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.

Kamala was too little too late. No candidate was going to work for democrats coming into the presidential race so close to the election.
Post reply on HN