« prev   random   next »
1   tovarichpeter   ignore (2)   2018 Apr 29, 11:41am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

The single family suburban sprawl created by the NIMBY folks is the cause of the traffic gridlock in the Bay Area as it makes public transportation uneconomical.
2   TrumpingTits   ignore (0)   2018 Apr 29, 6:23pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

I think that at this point only a Nuclear Option would prevail:

Each chartered city would be given a mandate of X amount of housing to be built by whatever means possible per year. If they just want to lift building code and zoning restrictions to do this, that's one way. Allow for more generous exemptions for granny flats in the back yard of existing houses, fine. To subsidized purchase prices with taxpayer money is another. What they will not be allowed to do is force developers to build and sell for below cost to achieve that latter option.

Those cities that do not meet this annual quota -- for whatever reason -- would have their city charters revoked, period. That would be the death sentence for cities.. Administration would be taken over by the State. Oh, and as part of that all city politicians and employees would instantly lose their pension rights as part of that, too. After all, those rights were guaranteed by the city corporate entity that no longer exists, so...

[sigh] but none of this will ever happen. Not short of some sort of violent revolution in the State, that is.
3   DASKAA   ignore (3)   2018 Apr 29, 6:35pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Why stop at state takover of cities? Let's go straight to Fed taking over states. At least the latter will improve our 2nd Amendment situation.
4   TrumpingTits   ignore (0)   2018 Apr 29, 7:13pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Satoshi_Nakamoto says
Let's go straight to Fed taking over states


Given some of the stances California state and local officials are taking on interfering with federal powers, I sometimes wonder thy the Insurrection Act hasn't been invoked yet. All Trump has to do is invoke it on one state, send in the troops, arrest and try its governor, legislators, judges, etc. in a military tribunal and that will send enough of a message to the others to get in line. If the state in question is still under federal occupation around Election Day, well...well...well...can you say, "arrest the Democrat thugs intimidated conservative voters at the polling booths and turning back the illegal voters bussed in from out of state by George Soros"? I can.
5   Strategist   ignore (1)   2018 Apr 29, 7:30pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

You will never get rid of NIMBY. You could sharply reduce their influence on politicians by changes in the law, State or Federal.
6   Strategist   ignore (1)   2018 Apr 29, 7:46pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

We need NMIBY vs YIMBY on the ballot box.
Let the people decide.
7   ForcedTQ   ignore (0)   2018 Apr 29, 8:13pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

tovarichpeter says
The single family suburban sprawl created by the NIMBY folks is the cause of the traffic gridlock in the Bay Area as it makes public transportation uneconomical.


You say that like a Tyrant central planner.... The liberty and freedom afforded an individual by a personal auto is not something someone should think public transportation is the magic bullet for.

When the majority of people that already live in an area say population density is high enough, thank you very much, that should be respected. The distribution of workplaces is something that should be looked at to relocate employment around the "urban-sprawl" that you so hate.
8   Strategist   ignore (1)   2018 Apr 29, 8:33pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

ForcedTQ says
When the majority of people that already live in an area say population density is high enough, thank you very much, that should be respected.


We live in a free country. No one has the right to stop anyone from moving to anywhere.
9   ForcedTQ   ignore (0)   2018 Apr 29, 9:17pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
ForcedTQ says
When the majority of people that already live in an area say population density is high enough, thank you very much, that should be respected.


We live in a free country. No one has the right to stop anyone from moving to anywhere.


Oh you think so, huh? So if a group of people got together and wrote zoning laws that identified the area to have x amount of dwellings per acre and no more?

Oh yeah, those exist. So you want to do away with those? This isn't about stopping anyone from moving to anywhere. If there is no housing to be had in an area, and the people that live in that area don't want higher density housing built in the area, they can work to keep zoning laws from changing to a higher density/allowing commercial/industrial to be developed in the area.

Are you saying we shouldn't have zoning laws? On a liberty/private property standpoint I believe that they are extremely restrictive, so I probably agree with you. On the current state of things, we have ceded control of land to government, we never actually "own" it. So until we pull our heads out of our asses and start owning property again, we're most likely stuck with the zoning scenario.
10   BayArea   ignore (0)   2018 Apr 29, 9:37pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Here are the fundamental problems:

1.) Once an individual buys a home, they become a NIMBY in most cases.

2.) NIMBYs pay the property taxes, so they are a very powerful group, despite being greatly outnumbered by people that want more development. These people don’t pay the property taxes.

Problem confirmed 😀
11   SFace   ignore (0)   2018 Apr 29, 10:21pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

NIMBY is a term that has no legal meaning. There are pros and cons to every debate.

If you want to address the problem, then you have the address the specific contention. What the hell is NIMBY? be specific, do we want to bulldoze Golden Gate Park or Central Park for housing?
12   TrumpingTits   ignore (0)   2018 Apr 29, 10:36pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

BayArea says
Once an individual buys a home, they become a NIMBY in 99% of cases.


Yes. They are like the Walkers in The Walking Dead. Once bitten, you're usually screwed & tattooed.




The Housing Trap
You're being set up to spend your life paying off a debt you don't need to take on, for a house that costs far more than it should. The conspirators are all around you, smiling to lure you in, carefully choosing their words and watching your reactions as they push your buttons, anxiously waiting for the moment when you sign the papers that will trap you and guarantee their payoff. Don't be just another victim of the housing market. Use this book to defend your freedom and defeat their schemes. You can win the game, but first you have to learn how to play it.
115 pages, $12.50

Kindle version available


about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions