Comment by cheriot | Hacker News Reader

Comment by cheriot | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I've seen people take that position and I see a fundamental mistake. Look at rust belt cities. Look at NYC in the 70s. When employers leave the people left behind are not better off. This doesn't mean we need to kiss big tech ass, but we have a city where getting a job is a solved problem. Very few places on earth have that.

Rent prices are the underlying problem pushing people out. Underlying _that_ problem is a lack of supply. SF zoned for and issued permits for a large number of offices, but not the corresponding residential structures to house those new workers. So they came here and were forced to compete with existing residents for a place to live.

The fix is to keep the economic prosperity and build more housing.

> Meanwhile socioeconomic disparity is an oozing sore in San Francisco

I'd argue that mixed income neighborhoods are the best kind. Many of the mechanisms for disadvantaging poor communities require geographic segregation. School quality, policing practices, etc

> Underlying _that_ problem is a lack of supply

And underlying that problem is Prop 13 - the insane multi billion dollar tax break that Californians bestowed on all land speculators. Until it's gone nothing will change.

Prop 13 is fucking horrible. We can't blame it for everything, though. It doesn't stop SF from zoning for more residential units or allowing the existing ones to be subdivided. All of those new units pay full freight.

Zoning laws aren't laws of physics. People make those up to align with what works best for them. Prop 13 strongly incentivizes less housing (because it boosts voters asset values with no downside to homeowners) and more commercial (because cities now rely on sales taxes to stay functional).

Until the landowners start to feel some downside from the housing disaster don't expect anything to change.

Landowners are a minority in the city. The divide is deeper than just property values because 100% BMR units are obstructed the same way.

if landowners are a minority of the city, then how do laws pass that benefit them so much at the cost of the majority?

Look at this year's no on 15 campaign. If you lie, but lie loud enough, even people who are hurt by your tax cut will support it.

> The fix is to keep the economic prosperity and build more housing.

That makes sense to me. I don't keep up with exact SF policies but I'm guessing there are zoning and the NIMBY factor to deal with.

Underlying this problem is? Money, influence and power? I know a soon to be ex-POTUS that might be the perfect man for the job! He can come in and cut all deals needed. Then SF is saved and then he goes from city to city and country to country to redeem himself.

Yes, NIMBY zoning and a planning process that makes even zoning compliant projects difficult to impossible.

The Board of Supervisors are elected from districts instead of city wide. This means they're heavily influenced by neighborhood associations with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. Throw in the normal, human fear of change and... the result isn't pretty.

Proposition L is not enough tax to take away the economic prosperity.

I am all for building more and more dense housing. I'm not sure how to accomplish it. The way I see it, SF either becomes more dense, or it becomes even more of "a toy city for rich people" & loses all hope of economic diversity.

I grew up in Michigan. I am well aware of how cities can fall into decline. My wife on the other hand grew up in Minnesota. So in my mind, I often compare Detroit with Minneapolis. I think the problem with Detroit is that, it never diversified. It was all auto industry. Minneapolis's economy has several pillars: finance, insurance, healthcare, industry. You can ask yourself whether or not SF is either Detroit or Minneapolis in this example. I tend to think of SF as the New York of the West coast. It has very unique geographical advantages. It will have ups and downs, but will continue to be reborn.

> we have a city where getting a job is a solved problem.

This is the case for the tech industry, not categorically. Important distinction there.

I'm not saying it's _easy_ to find a job, but the city's unemployment rate was 2%. That's unheard of.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CASANF0URN

Reply on news.ycombinator.com