The DMV needs a YIMBY revolution

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If we don't go YIMBY we'll become Toronto. Where housing prices are so sky high that owning a home is a luxury out of reach for most.

Yep, the YIMBY mindset is driven by resentment and envy that you don't own homes like others do.

[Anonymous]

One of my favorite quotes about communism.

“What would happen if the Communists occupied the Sahara? Answer: Nothing—for 50 years. Then there would be a shortage of sand.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Most Europeans cities and towns were laid out before the advent of the automobile - which is why they are walkable because they had to be. And so they planned public connective transit because they had to and did that very well.
But there are many areas of Europe that are not connected by transit and are not walkable. The poster above is referencing major towns.
They do have some wastelands of parking and strip mall areas, not as much as the US, but they do exist. They are ugly and tucked in the back away from town centers.

There is a difference between advocating for multi-family dwellings and arguing against urban planning centered around the automobile. Don't conflate the two as they are completely different issues.

The point is, all of those "pre-car" walkable places are the ones that everyone loves to visit Clearly more livable and human scale. So why not make that the norm, rather than auto-centric dreck that we have in every cookie cutter suburban area in the US?

People also love to visit museums, the Grand Canyon, and Disney World.

And Disney has "public transportation" and is entirely walkable. Ironic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we don't go YIMBY we'll become Toronto. Where housing prices are so sky high that owning a home is a luxury out of reach for most.

But those that can do buy and take care of their properties - preserving and increasing the value. Sounds like - gulp - capitalism.

Capitalism would - gulp - generally allow owners of private property to decide what to do with their private property, including what to build on it..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

Bingo. Miserable people who resent anyone who lives in a single-family home with a nice yard. This thread is hilarious.

+1

It's a bunch of self congratulatory wannabee intellectuals that can't afford a SFH in..... Del Ray, so they want to instead ruin it for those that can. Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people how they need to live.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

Bingo. Miserable people who resent anyone who lives in a single-family home with a nice yard. This thread is hilarious.

+1

It's a bunch of self congratulatory wannabee intellectuals that can't afford a SFH in..... Del Ray, so they want to instead ruin it for those that can. Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people how they need to live.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people what they are and aren't allowed to do with their own property.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

Bingo. Miserable people who resent anyone who lives in a single-family home with a nice yard. This thread is hilarious.

+1

It's a bunch of self congratulatory wannabee intellectuals that can't afford a SFH in..... Del Ray, so they want to instead ruin it for those that can. Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people how they need to live.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people what they are and aren't allowed to do with their own property.

This is what I don’t understand about YIMBYs. It’s not surprising that people why buy homes within a SFH neighborhood choose the location because they want to be IN a SFH neighborhood. If an apartment building goes up nextdoor they are no longer in the neighborhood they bought in.

If you already live in a mixed use community that gets more densely developed that’s a different story because it doesn’t change the entire structure of the neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we don't go YIMBY we'll become Toronto. Where housing prices are so sky high that owning a home is a luxury out of reach for most.

But those that can do buy and take care of their properties - preserving and increasing the value. Sounds like - gulp - capitalism.

Capitalism would - gulp - generally allow owners of private property to decide what to do with their private property, including what to build on it..

So right, PP - so let met add you mix zoning etc etc folks have at it. SFH is like high end anything- scarcity is value. So - any smart capitalist knows this and is not giving up that scarce commodity because of its value - to multiple unit builds which lower the value of their good. Gulp - college and econ is a good route to take to understand these concepts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

Bingo. Miserable people who resent anyone who lives in a single-family home with a nice yard. This thread is hilarious.

+1

It's a bunch of self congratulatory wannabee intellectuals that can't afford a SFH in..... Del Ray, so they want to instead ruin it for those that can. Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people how they need to live.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people what they are and aren't allowed to do with their own property.

This is what I don’t understand about YIMBYs. It’s not surprising that people why buy homes within a SFH neighborhood choose the location because they want to be IN a SFH neighborhood. If an apartment building goes up nextdoor they are no longer in the neighborhood they bought in.

If you already live in a mixed use community that gets more densely developed that’s a different story because it doesn’t change the entire structure of the neighborhood.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell your neighbor that they're not allowed to build a building on their property, because you don't like change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we don't go YIMBY we'll become Toronto. Where housing prices are so sky high that owning a home is a luxury out of reach for most.

But those that can do buy and take care of their properties - preserving and increasing the value. Sounds like - gulp - capitalism.

Capitalism would - gulp - generally allow owners of private property to decide what to do with their private property, including what to build on it..

So right, PP - so let met add you mix zoning etc etc folks have at it. SFH is like high end anything- scarcity is value. So - any smart capitalist knows this and is not giving up that scarce commodity because of its value - to multiple unit builds which lower the value of their good. Gulp - college and econ is a good route to take to understand these concepts.

If the owners of private property aren't going to build duplexes anyway, why are you so strenuously opposing the rezoning that would allow them to do so? Why would you bother opposing it, if you weren't worried that they actually will build duplexes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

Bingo. Miserable people who resent anyone who lives in a single-family home with a nice yard. This thread is hilarious.

+1

It's a bunch of self congratulatory wannabee intellectuals that can't afford a SFH in..... Del Ray, so they want to instead ruin it for those that can. Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people how they need to live.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people what they are and aren't allowed to do with their own property.

This is what I don’t understand about YIMBYs. It’s not surprising that people why buy homes within a SFH neighborhood choose the location because they want to be IN a SFH neighborhood. If an apartment building goes up nextdoor they are no longer in the neighborhood they bought in.

If you already live in a mixed use community that gets more densely developed that’s a different story because it doesn’t change the entire structure of the neighborhood.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell your neighbor that they're not allowed to build a building on their property, because you don't like change.

There must be a major difference/disconnect in how people feel about their neighborhoods. It’s clear that there are those that truly feel that you should only care about your own house and not care about the neighborhood as a whole or what you’re living nextdoor to.

There are also many of us who value our neighborhoods as a whole, whether it’s a TH development, a SFH development or condo community. We bought based on the entire neighborhood and not just our personal homes. If we wanted to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, we would have bought next to one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

Bingo. Miserable people who resent anyone who lives in a single-family home with a nice yard. This thread is hilarious.

+1

It's a bunch of self congratulatory wannabee intellectuals that can't afford a SFH in..... Del Ray, so they want to instead ruin it for those that can. Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people how they need to live.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people what they are and aren't allowed to do with their own property.

This is what I don’t understand about YIMBYs. It’s not surprising that people why buy homes within a SFH neighborhood choose the location because they want to be IN a SFH neighborhood. If an apartment building goes up nextdoor they are no longer in the neighborhood they bought in.

If you already live in a mixed use community that gets more densely developed that’s a different story because it doesn’t change the entire structure of the neighborhood.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell your neighbor that they're not allowed to build a building on their property, because you don't like change.

There must be a major difference/disconnect in how people feel about their neighborhoods. It’s clear that there are those that truly feel that you should only care about your own house and not care about the neighborhood as a whole or what you’re living nextdoor to.

There are also many of us who value our neighborhoods as a whole, whether it’s a TH development, a SFH development or condo community. We bought based on the entire neighborhood and not just our personal homes. If we wanted to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, we would have bought next to one.

There's a meaningful distinction between "care about" and "own". I care about my neighborhood. I don't tell my neighbor he can't paint his door a color I don't like.

If you don't want to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, then you need to buy the property next door.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we don't go YIMBY we'll become Toronto. Where housing prices are so sky high that owning a home is a luxury out of reach for most.

Yep, the YIMBY mindset is driven by resentment and envy that you don't own homes like others do.

I wrote that post, and I do indeed own my home. I love it, and don't envy and resent others for owning their homes. I just don't think they should tell others what kind of home they are allowed to build.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we don't go YIMBY we'll become Toronto. Where housing prices are so sky high that owning a home is a luxury out the of reach for most.

But those that can do buy and take care of their properties - preserving and increasing the value. Sounds like - gulp - capitalism.

Capitalism would - gulp - generally allow owners of private property to decide what to do with their private property, including what to build on it..

So right, PP - so let met add you mix zoning etc etc folks have at it. SFH is like high end anything- scarcity is value. So - any smart capitalist knows this and is not giving up that scarce commodity because of its value - to multiple unit builds which lower the value of their good. Gulp - college and econ is a good route to take to understand these concepts.

If the owners of private property aren't going to build duplexes anyway, why are you so strenuously opposing the rezoning that would allow them to do so? Why would you bother opposing it, if you weren't worried that they actually will build duplexes?

You know the answer - SFH keeps folks who are not interested in building family wealth out. And you must also know that you need serious capital to buy into real estate in DC - which either means the smaller price tags of SFH or you are a developer in private equity buying in. Do you have either of these? Why do you protest so much? Can you own - property in DC or are you writing because you can't? There is not a shortage of rentals in DC - have at it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we don't go YIMBY we'll become Toronto. Where housing prices are so sky high that owning a home is a luxury out the of reach for most.

But those that can do buy and take care of their properties - preserving and increasing the value. Sounds like - gulp - capitalism.

Capitalism would - gulp - generally allow owners of private property to decide what to do with their private property, including what to build on it..

So right, PP - so let met add you mix zoning etc etc folks have at it. SFH is like high end anything- scarcity is value. So - any smart capitalist knows this and is not giving up that scarce commodity because of its value - to multiple unit builds which lower the value of their good. Gulp - college and econ is a good route to take to understand these concepts.

If the owners of private property aren't going to build duplexes anyway, why are you so strenuously opposing the rezoning that would allow them to do so? Why would you bother opposing it, if you weren't worried that they actually will build duplexes?

You know the answer - SFH keeps folks who are not interested in building family wealth out. And you must also know that you need serious capital to buy into real estate in DC - which either means the smaller price tags of SFH or you are a developer in private equity buying in. Do you have either of these? Why do you protest so much? Can you own - property in DC or are you writing because you can't? There is not a shortage of rentals in DC - have at it.

I'm sorry, I have no idea what point you're making. What does my owning property in DC, or not owning property in DC, have to do with the idea of rezoning residential areas from only allowing one type of housing, to allowing several types of housing?