patrick.net

NIMBYism rarely *prevents* development. My assertion is merely that it is a lever to try to hold developers and local governments to abide by contractual agreements. That said, it rarely even succeeds in doing that.

For an example of Tragedy of the Commons visit Columbus Ohio, Indiannapolis, or even most of LA. These are places that could have benefited from more NIMBYs during their development booms.

NIMBYism rarely *prevents* development. My assertion is merely that it is a lever to try to hold developers and local governments to abide by contractual agreements. That said, it rarely even succeeds in doing that.

I certainly hope so. To me, it appears to be little more than an organized form of self-interest preservation.

For an example of Tragedy of the Commons visit Columbus Ohio, Indiannapolis, or even most of LA. These are places that could have benefited from more NIMBYs during their development booms.

Perhaps, but I would prefer oversight by an independent (no conflict of interest) entity.

If you want to experience a simulation of Tragedy of the Commons firsthand, download and logon (free) to SecondLife (www.secondlife.com). It's a virtual world where all content is player generated, including a "land ownership" dimension. It started off as a creative community with lots of interesting development. It morphed into a horryifying clusterfuck once it hit critical population. 1-2 hours is plenty to experience the "why" of zoning rules and community norms in the real world. (Don't pay for it though, these types of virtual-worlds are as addictive as crack, and provide an equal contribution to society).

Perhaps, but I would prefer oversight by an independent (no conflict of interest) entity.

If self-governing democracy worked (or at least people believed it worked), then this wouldn't be necessary, or probably happen. Because people have no other means of influence, they exert their will through NIMBY. Of course they are self interested. It's entirely a polarization battle.

Sunnyvale-Renter, I disagree. I think we should let the free market decide what the world should be like, so long as no one is harmed.

If you like Japan and intend to become Japanese, you should feel free to do it. Just do not make it another America. :)

I thought that in a free market, everything will eventually become America.

I thought that in a free market, everything will eventually become America.

Good quote, Randy. :)

We must protect diversity in the food business though. Must have many kinds of good food!

PeterP > Soros > Bingham > Sheehan
tegtuowon

Huh?

I'm sure we'll still have California Rolls.

Of course they are self interested. It’s entirely a polarization battle.

Absolutely true. Perhaps there is nothing we can do about it. We can only play along.

I’m sure we’ll still have California Rolls.

No imitation crab please, even though it is more cost effective. :)

I respect restaurants that use king crab in their california rolls.

Great, I'm going to bed depressed again then, lol. Unless you know how to compute GARCH(1,1) volatility (with leverage) on an "exotic" dataset.

@Randy H & SV_Renter,

Look, I'm all for a reasonable level urban planning/zoning. We all want to have liveable neighborhoods with good infrastructure --roads, bridges, plumbing, sewers, schools, parks, etc.-- not unplanned sprawling ghettos.

But for the life of me, I can't see how artificially attempting to constrain supply (anti-development laws/punitive government fees) does anything except to help drive up the cost of housing for ALL non-rich families. Nor do I see how constraining supply prevents more people from immigrating here, illegal or otherwise.

Regardless of how high the cost of housing goes, immigrants (and the industries/lobbies that depend on them) always seem to manage to find a way to cram in more warm bodies. Trying to choke off supply is just not going to change this, in fact it can actually INCREASE the population density, as poor people are forced to be packed 20 to a house for lack of affordable alternatives.

L.A.'s high population density, urban blight and deteriorating standard of living seem to be more a function of flawed (more always=better) national immigration policy and cynical race politics than a lack of NIMBY development restrictions.

NIMBYism rarely *prevents* development. My assertion is merely that it is a lever to try to hold developers and local governments to abide by contractual agreements. That said, it rarely even succeeds in doing that.

Indeed.

If you want to experience a simulation of Tragedy of the Commons firsthand, download and logon (free) to SecondLife (www.secondlife.com).

I will give it a try. Did you know that we now have fields such as Computational Ecology and Computational Sociology? :)

Isn't it amazing that a supposedly chaotic system can have some predictable and recurring patterns? (We call tham attractors?)

Computational Ecology and Computational Sociology? :)

Isn’t it amazing that a supposedly chaotic system can have some predictable and recurring patterns? (We call tham attractors?)

Linden Labs in SF, the makers of SecondLife, have sponsored a lot of such work in their virtual world. It is actually quite an interesting study. I studied it intensively more for the economic model abstractions and came away pretty depressed.

chaotic system can have some predictable and recurring patterns? (We call tham attractors?)

I call these attractors the "Ayn Rand was right even though we hate it" set.

Sunnyvale_Renter, it is only natural for first-generation immigrants to want to live close together. Not being familiar with the new country, where else would you expect them to live except close to those who speak the same language? That is the case of first-generation of Vietnamese immigrants in Garden Grove, Fountain Valley, etc., and now, the Chinese newcomers in Cupertino.

Don't worry, though. Eventually, when these immigrants' children grow up, they will get tired of living in the 'hood and will spread out. That's my preference, and I'm sure there are many other young fellow Asians sharing the same thoughts with me. Soon Cupertino will be returned to the "rightful owners", whoever those are in your mind, and there will be a new ethnic group coming in and becoming dominant. No matter what that group is, be certain you will see the same problems: overcrowding, trees chopped down, non-diversified public schools (or is it the same with private schools?), and condos sprawling. Then maybe you will wish to see Asians coming back :-)

Perhaps you should be glad that Cupertino is crowded. That means to many people, it's a pretty desirable place to live, despite the fact that you'll have to cram yourselves into the tiny places of condos, and fight for a parking spot during lunchtime in China, I mean Cupertino, Village.

intersting read

http://www.rense.com/general69/prop.htm

What’s so wonderful about immigrants from Poland, Italy or Ireland when compared to ones from Taiwan? I don’t get it.

No kidding. Population density always tends to rise in response to population pressure in an area of constrained housing supply, reagrdless of whether this is caused by net immigration (legal or otherwise) or higher-than-replacement birth rates. I'm sure no N.Y. natives back in the 19th century were singing the praises of the Eastern European ghettos.

More development is a natural result of a free market reacting to such added demand. Development doesn't cause density anymore than freeways cause traffic.

Give Sunnyvale_Renter credit where it's due. He is obviously a very skilled typist.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

The right to petition the government for a redress of grievances protect the individual against bad acts of the government against the individual. Zoning is a government act that the Supreme Court recognized as such an act the affected property owner may petition and sue the acting government.

I participated in overturning a zoning decision to create a wide offramp and restructuring of a local street designed to enhance a site for a proposed Home Depot.

OT The market is tanking and TOL just hit an new 52 week low.

TOL 32.32

Sunnyvale_renter wrote:

"And while I have to agree that my ancestors from England and Germany etc also lived in some pretty crammed in places, and the first generations lived in horrible stacked-up tenements in NYC etc., and it was only subsequent generations who were able to afford to spread and out and exercise their cultural/genetic love for the land. In the human system, the human way of life, however, the goal is to cover the earth with a solid blanket of humans if possible. Look at who have been the winners and the losers in just the USA over say the last 150 years. The First Nations folks believed in being able to live on lots of land, walk/ride a horse where you like, harvest nuts and hunt etc., so their chosen density was low."

There's so much stuff factually wrong with this and other things you wrote, it's hard to even know where to start. Let's hit the basics:

Your ancestors have no more a genetic love for trees than any other people, and there's absolutely no evidence to say otherwise. For proof, look at one of the most Germanic places in the US - eastern Pennsylvania. A place almost exclusively Germanic in the past, and now largely devoid of wilderness (or in some areas, like Hazard, plant life. Damn depressing.)

As for the first nations, they didn't "choose" a low population density - they lacked the food crops which allowed them to cluster into large cities like the Asians and Europeans. They certainly stripped the Great Forest to become the Great Plains within a millenia of their arrival. (What - you thought that was always grassland?) No rice, wheat, barley, rye, or any grain except for corn, the widespread successful cultivation of which only happened a few centuries before the arrival of the Europeans and the pandemics they brought. And note that that cultivation was leading to the first large cites in the Mississippi delta at around the time that disease destroyed their culture. Learn a little history before you pretend to know it.

As for the racial drivel you're spouting about Asians, do a little research, for goodness sake. It's the same mindless crap that folks were saying about my ancestors (the Germans and the Irish) only a century ago.

I remember when y'all used to talk about housing. Now everytime I come by, it's race-baiting. I'm out of here.

I agree, my post is horrible, racist, and also true.

Sunnvale_Renter is not a racist. A "culturist" perhaps, which is understandable.

I am also kind of a "romantic" type of person. However, I understand that things change, so I do try to enjoy the moment and the flux. Only change is permanent, perhaps we can find beauty in changes?

PeterP > Soros > Bingham > Sheehan
tegtuowon

barnum, can you pick a screen name and stick to it? :)

SFWoman, I have deleted the "fake" post.

Davis renter

Beis statements on the guidance the Fed gave validates its position.

Fed to BURST HOUSING BUBBLE

Death to flippers and subprime mortgage products.

On Dec 20 the Fed published for 60 day comment a new rule:
“Interagency Guidance on Nontraditional Mortgage Products”
“Collateral-Dependent Loans – Institutions should avoid the use of loan terms and underwriting practices that may result in the borrower having to rely on the sale or refinancing of the property once amortization begins. Loans to borrowers who do not demonstrate the capacity to repay, as structured, from sources other than the collateral pledged are generally considered unsafe and unsound. Institutions determined to be originating collateral-dependent mortgage loans, may be subject to criticism, corrective action, and higher capital requirements.”

Flippers and subprime lenders are DOOMED...

Looks like the Fed is set to strangle these cancerous liquidity excesses. Starts and planets are aligning...

Aren’t permits needed to cut down trees? Are there laws restricting the number of people in a unit that are being ignored?

An unenforced law is nothing more than a paper tiger. Where the those NIMBYists when we need them? ;)

I don't want to get on *yet another* race-dominated thread tangent, so I'll just say the following:

I personally tend to prefer medium-to-low density living. In fact, as soon as I have the opportunity, I will be leaving my ultra-high density area (LA County) for greener pastures. Nonetheless, I believe my wants/desires have nothing to do with demographic trends, local population density, zoning, land prices, geography, etc., which determines what type of housing is actually built in a given area.

While the current credit-fueled Bubble has hugely skewed the demand side of the supply/demand situation (and to a somewhat lesser extent the supply side as well), when we eliminate the Bubble's effects from the equation, we still see that the long-term trend in CA (and most areas in the U.S.) is away from lower-density and towards higher-density living.

Why? Population pressure, pure and simple. Even if housing prices fully retrenched tomorrow to pre-2000 levels, we're not going to see a return to a rural/agrarian way of life that was common generations ago. That would require an unlikely collapse in the immigration and/or birth rate.

Would a much lower overall birthrate and/or more restrictive immigration policy help slow rapid sprawl and urbanization? Sure. Would this be desirable from a quality-of-life standpoint for most current inhabitants? Probably, but it's not politically/economically acceptable at this time for the powerful interests who determine the nations's policies.

@Hoss Cartwright,

I posted before I saw your response. Funny how similar they were.

My solution: tax gasoline so that it reflects the true costs of it, probably half of our military budget and lots of other expenses.

I agree. Make it $10 a gallon. We need a change.

While you are pricing to reflect the true costs, reprice AMTRAC and carpool lanes to mark to market.

I suggest:

1) A flat income tax that is collected completely from the employer only (we need a look-through mechanism for subcontracting so that the ultimate employer will be responsible for the tax payment)

2) A national gasoline/diesel tax (we need tax credit for transportation companies)

3) Privatization all public schools (vouchers should be given to legal residents)

We want to make it so that even if the border is completely open, it would still be harmless.

We should also collect a fee to use the road. Perhaps we should charge people based on the number of vehicles that are already on the road. This way, traffic flow will tend to self adjust.

@SQT,

I just read (as much of it as I could in 10 mins) your "exchange" with Polish Knight in the "Anger" thread. Wow. No one can accuse you of being afraid to debate. Too bad it was a total waste of time, though.

Yeah, I don’t know why I let myself get sucked in though. I guess I hoped for an actual exchange of ideas. But once someone get’s into ALWAYS ON TRANSMIT NEVER ON RECEIVE mode, there’s just no hope.

There is a "Delete" link, you know. ;)

And when I say green space, I don’t mean a baseball diamond, I mean a multi-use space.

We can afford more green space if we build more high-rise condos. More capacity and more space. Two birds with one stone.

Tokyo also has green space...

Which is more expensive? Central Park or the Imperial Palace?