I don't even live in Silicon Valley, but it seems like every local dork on Twitter that tweets stuff like "Build Baby Build" has Dev Ops or "Full Stack Engineer" in their profile.
I don't even live in Silicon Valley, but it seems like every local dork on Twitter that tweets stuff like "Build Baby Build" has Dev Ops or "Full Stack Engineer" in their profile.
What’s the case against YIMBYs? We don’t want more housing built?
YIMBYism is people moving in the right direction, but getting stuck on policies that don't work. The issue has never been housing availability, it's been the hoarding of housing ownership.
It's pretty much like libs vs chuds in my view, YIMBYs are annoying and wrong cause they left any concept of socialism at the door, but not 100% wrong. NIMBYs are 100% idiot jackasses.
You might find me occasionally alongside the YIMBYs when NIMBYville Santa Monica takes a massive L, or in their fight to densify NIMBY-Mecca San Francisco, but it doesn't mean they are gonna solve everything cause their stances are chock full of liberalism.
A lot of tech people live in the bay area, where the problem is both.
deleted by creator
It is true that building more housing won't fix the fundamental issues. But it won't make them worse either.
Bigger apartments are good because they slightly reduce rent and more density is better for public transit. California just made it legal to build apartments without parking lots near metro stations so those would be really good.
deleted by creator
My apartment is rent controlled because it is older then 15 years old. New construction in California isn't rent controlled in the beginning though. It's quite old,. has asbestos in the walls, so it is cheaper than the other places nearby.
Rent increases in a neighborhood always make people unhoused and new construction reduces the rent slightly. It's not a solution to that at all.
Hopefully removing parking minimum requirements lets some non-luxury things are built. Cars are expensive so it is dumb that an apartment targeting towards people without cars could not be built.
Usually YIMBYs (the annoying neolib kind) mean no parking, no transit, no regulations on housing, let developers do whatever and let it rip. Before regulations came in, there didn't use to be clean air standards or light or fire considerations, nor protections like ADA. They want slums for the poors and nice condos for them with no parking and no transit ("hire a cab ya bum").
The socialist resolution to the contradiction of housing is to decommodify it entirely and provision housing based on need instead of profit. Keeping it as a market commodity means slums or this half fucked thing we have now where there's tons of houses out there that are empty but people are not allowed to live in them because they aren't profitable.
Yes, we want to build - we need to build - denser and dignified housing for all, that can also be energy efficient and built out of carbon neutral/negative materials and techniques. Yes, it'll probably be in some former rich fucks backyard that he was hoarding.
In California at least YIMBYs aren't about stopping the state from having regulations as much as they are against stopping city council from blocking all construction