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

Attack of the Fifty-Foot NIMBYs

i.stanford.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 95 posts

Re: Attack of the Fifty-Foot NIMBYs

#71

Post by guylhem »

malandrew wrote: post #58

Am I the only one that finds it ironic that 90% of the examples of NIMBYism cited in this thread and the example cited in the original article revolve around cars? Cars are the epitomy of an externality and are inherently anti-community and anti-commons. A vehicle that can move at 20mph to 70+ mph and comes in contact with human beings (as opposed to being segregated from them by barriers or being buried underground…

I found a good example on seniors healthcare, while reading overcomingbias today. It hasn't been discussed that much in the thread. Maybe that's because of the political link of the issue? Then it's not a bad thing.

Yet healthcare is the total opposite of anti-community !

Re: Attack of the Fifty-Foot NIMBYs

#72

Post by js2 »

luser001 wrote: post #35

I actually support "vicious" speedbumps. People regularly drive 40 mph on my road which has official speed limit of 25 mph. Instead of spending money policing main streets, I support draconian camera-driven enforcement on side streets. Make unmarked google-maps-like cars with high quality cameras and software. Park it on streets and watch for traffic. Send tickets remotely to speeders (equivalent to running a red lig…

I was once told by a traffic engineer that a more effective way to slow traffic through neighborhoods (traffic calming) is narrower lanes, such as via wide bike lanes or a median strip. I have personally observed this to be true in a subdivision I drive through (narrow lanes) vs my own (wide street with speed humps).

Re: Attack of the Fifty-Foot NIMBYs

#73

Post by prodigal_erik »

chris_wot wrote: post #64
guylhem wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow that's luck - just when I was browsing around I found the perfect analysis on overcoming bias : senior voters and their healtcare - paid for by the majority, but since seniors vote more, they favour the candidate serving their interest - at the expanse of the majority http://www.overcomingbias.com/2012/09/us-politics-of-medicin... Very interesting indeed- it seems to be the simplest pitfall of democracy : when th…

In Australia, this isn't such a problem. Voting is mandatory. I'll now await to hear the almost universal condemnation or be downvoted by American participants...

Anyone genuinely indifferent about voting is not going to be well-informed and do it wisely; letting them stay home is a pretty good signal/noise filter that's hard to object to. The only problem that mandatory voting solves is prospective voters whose abusive employers or families wouldn't permit them to vote otherwise.

Re: Attack of the Fifty-Foot NIMBYs

#74

Post by ImprovedSilence »

michaelochurch wrote: post #60
liber8 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm also curious why you claim that "'star' locations have barely dipped (yet)." In southern California, many of the highest priced areas have seen property values literally fall by half. I know many other such areas around the country have been similarly affected by the housing collapse, though I haven't seen any data measuring just top-end properties.

New York and Northern California are still extremely high, even relative to incomes. Purchase prices are declining but rents are actually increasing in Manhattan. My theory is that this is an artifact of the damage done to job markets everywhere else by the recession. The few places where the job market remains strong are seeing rents hold ground or even increase, on account of what is effectively supply destruction…

Yeah, DC didn't drop at all, in fact I think it only went up as well...

Re: Attack of the Fifty-Foot NIMBYs

#75

Post by prodigal_erik »

gammarator wrote: post #39
lnanek2 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know I run into them a lot trying to drive around Berkeley. It's a huge pain in the ass to cars trying to navigate through. Obviously home owners must love them, though. "How would you like if we blocked off your road to traffic so it becomes a quiet cul-de-sac?" "Yes, please!" Forget about hurting everyone else coming through.

"It's a huge pain in the ass to cars trying to navigate through." And therefore it's a real pleasure to bike, walk, or take transit. Having moved away from Berkeley to a city that prioritizes car travel above all else, I find I choose now to drive two blocks rather than walk because it's just unpleasant to get buzzed by cars doing 50 in a 35 on residential streets.

MUNI averages 7-8 MPH, which is why a short round trip across San Francisco takes two hours (assuming it even shows up). It's exceptionally hard to start with awful at-grade transit and somehow make driving so much worse that people stop doing it. "Traffic calming" isn't bad enough, it just produces unpredictable and impatient driving.

Re: Attack of the Fifty-Foot NIMBYs

#76

Post by nitrogen »

prodigal_erik wrote: post #73
chris_wot wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Australia, this isn't such a problem. Voting is mandatory. I'll now await to hear the almost universal condemnation or be downvoted by American participants...

Anyone genuinely indifferent about voting is not going to be well-informed and do it wisely; letting them stay home is a pretty good signal/noise filter that's hard to object to. The only problem that mandatory voting solves is prospective voters whose abusive employers or families wouldn't permit them to vote otherwise.

Mandatory voting would solve some problems caused by strongly motivated minorities voting for their own interests. For example, even apathetic young people forced to vote would be unlikely to vote for an elderly care plan that would inevitably bankrupt their country.

Re: Attack of the Fifty-Foot NIMBYs

#77

Post by bengoodger »

natrius wrote: post #25
ff0066mote wrote: post #17

I read the whole article, but stopped taking it seriously at: "a vicious collection of roadblocks" I think it's fine for people to desire quieter neighborhoods in this era of high population density. I don't think that the people in all of those examples were pursuing change for the financial gain.

Roadblocks make one part of a neighborhood quieter at the expense of another part. They also make traffic worse, which increases wasted time and pollution. If enough of those policies get implemented, people will find it too hard to get to downtown Palo Alto, and the shops that make it attractive to live there in the first place will suffer. Policymaking based on parochial interests without regard to the effect those…

PA city council is already hard at work at this, choking off key arteries like Arastradero/Charleston Rd for "safety" (their attempt at lowering speed was to choke bandwidth, worsening traffic jams at peak hours).

Re: Attack of the Fifty-Foot NIMBYs

#78

Post by goodcanadian »

luser001 wrote: post #35

I actually support "vicious" speedbumps. People regularly drive 40 mph on my road which has official speed limit of 25 mph. Instead of spending money policing main streets, I support draconian camera-driven enforcement on side streets. Make unmarked google-maps-like cars with high quality cameras and software. Park it on streets and watch for traffic. Send tickets remotely to speeders (equivalent to running a red lig…

I STRONGLY oppose speed bumps. They do not slow down traffic; they just make people drive erratically. People race in between the bumps and then brake hard and go over the bumps at a ridiculously low speed. All the while, the drivers are paying more attention to the bumps than to any pedestrians or pets or cars that might be about. Enforcement may help; intelligent road design may help; speed bumps are not the answer.

Re: Attack of the Fifty-Foot NIMBYs

#79

Post by Spooky23 »

luser001 wrote: post #35

I actually support "vicious" speedbumps. People regularly drive 40 mph on my road which has official speed limit of 25 mph. Instead of spending money policing main streets, I support draconian camera-driven enforcement on side streets. Make unmarked google-maps-like cars with high quality cameras and software. Park it on streets and watch for traffic. Send tickets remotely to speeders (equivalent to running a red lig…

I take it that you don't live in a place that has winter (speed bumps == ice humps) or have back pain.

Re: Attack of the Fifty-Foot NIMBYs

#80

Post by malandrew »

guylhem wrote: post #71
malandrew wrote: post #58

Am I the only one that finds it ironic that 90% of the examples of NIMBYism cited in this thread and the example cited in the original article revolve around cars? Cars are the epitomy of an externality and are inherently anti-community and anti-commons. A vehicle that can move at 20mph to 70+ mph and comes in contact with human beings (as opposed to being segregated from them by barriers or being buried underground…

I found a good example on seniors healthcare, while reading overcomingbias today. It hasn't been discussed that much in the thread. Maybe that's because of the political link of the issue? Then it's not a bad thing. Yet healthcare is the total opposite of anti-community !

Yes and no. It's definitely an externality issue where one group robs another via voting power, but it's not NIMBYism because it doesn't involve "backyards"/neighborhoods.
Post reply on HN