Hacker News Reader

Comment by danielvaughn | Hacker News Reader

San Francisco is known for being one of the most progressive areas in the country, and there's a common belief that progressive government policies led to the situation they are now facing.

Before anyone responds looking to argue, I'm not saying whether it's true or false, just stating that that's the perception.

View on HN

Progressives cluster in dense areas (and/or perhaps density causes progressiveness), and density also causes greater NIMBYism. It doesn't necessarily follow that progressivism causes NIMBYism.

The mistake is that on municipal and land use issues it's a two axis political system.

It's not left/right, it's also urbanist/conservationist.

You will find those on both the left and right that for various ideological reasons end up at the same point of wanting to obstruct new housing creation.

I see. Is there overlap between "progressives" and "housing nimbys" in the US?

Yes, both directly (NIMBYism is generally worse in liberal areas) and indirectly (density makes everything harder and more complicated).

left-nimby's, as they're called, obstruct housing with price controls and other uneconomical demands on housing producers and buyers. Often they reject projects out-of-hand if they show any possibility of making a profit.

There's overlap of both progressives and NIMBYS and conservatives and NIMBYS.

Just as there are progressive YIMBYS and "conservative" (usually labelled "market urbanist") YIMBYS.

The left/right axis is inadequate to describe the dynamics of municipal politics. You need a second urbanist/conservationist axis to describe support or opposition for housing development.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com