Greater Greater Washington as a news source

[Anonymous]

What do people make of Greater Greater Washington? Is it a blog or is it a local news source? I used to think it was a good source of updates on local events and such but it politically leans pretty far left. I suppose most publications around here would be.

I know the Elrich people hate it and call it fake news. I am no fan of Elrich, but I'm not sure if the enemy of my enemy is my friend here. I'm not sure if it's meant to be local buzz a la Washingtonian Magazine or if it's a politically motivated blog.

[Anonymous]

GGW is very much a pro-developer website. They push anything that supports greater urbanization and density, which aligns nicely with the real estate industry's goals.

[Anonymous]

I think it's one source among many to get local news if you're interested in housing & transit. But it can't be your only source. And a lot of the bloggers lack any sort of realistic perspective and are just naive "gee gosh the streetcar is nifty!" types, and are completely blind to the fact that transit systems have to serve more people than affluent, able 20-somethings with no kids ...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:GGW is very much a pro-developer website. They push anything that supports greater urbanization and density, which aligns nicely with the real estate industry's goals.

Being YIMBY is not being pro-developer. But yeah, "developer" is not a dirty word if you're interested in increasing affordable housing and livable cities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GGW is very much a pro-developer website. They push anything that supports greater urbanization and density, which aligns nicely with the real estate industry's goals.

Being YIMBY is not being pro-developer. But yeah, "developer" is not a dirty word if you're interested in increasing affordable housing and livable cities.

Developers don't care about affordable housing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GGW is very much a pro-developer website. They push anything that supports greater urbanization and density, which aligns nicely with the real estate industry's goals.

Being YIMBY is not being pro-developer. But yeah, "developer" is not a dirty word if you're interested in increasing affordable housing and livable cities.

This is developers' new spin, and it's just a bunch of double talk. Increasing density will only make the city more expensive and less livable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GGW is very much a pro-developer website. They push anything that supports greater urbanization and density, which aligns nicely with the real estate industry's goals.

Being YIMBY is not being pro-developer. But yeah, "developer" is not a dirty word if you're interested in increasing affordable housing and livable cities.

Developers don't care about affordable housing.

Well limiting the supply of housing surely isn't going to make it more affordable, or make cities more livable. (Unless your goal is to keep your neighborhood from changing at all, in which case, you're not really pro affordable housing either, most likely.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GGW is very much a pro-developer website. They push anything that supports greater urbanization and density, which aligns nicely with the real estate industry's goals.

Being YIMBY is not being pro-developer. But yeah, "developer" is not a dirty word if you're interested in increasing affordable housing and livable cities.

This is developers' new spin, and it's just a bunch of double talk. Increasing density will only make the city more expensive and less livable.

Ok genius, so where are people going to live?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GGW is very much a pro-developer website. They push anything that supports greater urbanization and density, which aligns nicely with the real estate industry's goals.

Being YIMBY is not being pro-developer. But yeah, "developer" is not a dirty word if you're interested in increasing affordable housing and livable cities.

Developers don't care about affordable housing.

Well limiting the supply of housing surely isn't going to make it more affordable, or make cities more livable. (Unless your goal is to keep your neighborhood from changing at all, in which case, you're not really pro affordable housing either, most likely.)

Have you been to New York City? They've packed as many people in as humanly possible, and it is neither affordable nor livable.

[Anonymous]

Okay this has devolved into a debate over development.

The topic at hand is "Is Greater Greater Washington a news source"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GGW is very much a pro-developer website. They push anything that supports greater urbanization and density, which aligns nicely with the real estate industry's goals.

Being YIMBY is not being pro-developer. But yeah, "developer" is not a dirty word if you're interested in increasing affordable housing and livable cities.

Developers don't care about affordable housing.

Well limiting the supply of housing surely isn't going to make it more affordable, or make cities more livable. (Unless your goal is to keep your neighborhood from changing at all, in which case, you're not really pro affordable housing either, most likely.)

Have you been to New York City? They've packed as many people in as humanly possible, and it is neither affordable nor livable.

I find NYC very livable. And limiting housing construction would not increase affordability, obviously. (PS: nobody every said that increasing density is all that's needed, but the converse -- being paranoidly anti-developer -- is only going to hurt, not help.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Okay this has devolved into a debate over development.

The topic at hand is "Is Greater Greater Washington a news source"

That's easy. No. It's a blog written from a pro-developer perspective. Read the Post or a real news source.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GGW is very much a pro-developer website. They push anything that supports greater urbanization and density, which aligns nicely with the real estate industry's goals.

Being YIMBY is not being pro-developer. But yeah, "developer" is not a dirty word if you're interested in increasing affordable housing and livable cities.

Developers don't care about affordable housing.

Well limiting the supply of housing surely isn't going to make it more affordable, or make cities more livable. (Unless your goal is to keep your neighborhood from changing at all, in which case, you're not really pro affordable housing either, most likely.)

Have you been to New York City? They've packed as many people in as humanly possible, and it is neither affordable nor livable.

I find NYC very livable. And limiting housing construction would not increase affordability, obviously. (PS: nobody every said that increasing density is all that's needed, but the converse -- being paranoidly anti-developer -- is only going to hurt, not help.)

You obviously don't have kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GGW is very much a pro-developer website. They push anything that supports greater urbanization and density, which aligns nicely with the real estate industry's goals.

Being YIMBY is not being pro-developer. But yeah, "developer" is not a dirty word if you're interested in increasing affordable housing and livable cities.

Developers don't care about affordable housing.

Well limiting the supply of housing surely isn't going to make it more affordable, or make cities more livable. (Unless your goal is to keep your neighborhood from changing at all, in which case, you're not really pro affordable housing either, most likely.)

Have you been to New York City? They've packed as many people in as humanly possible, and it is neither affordable nor livable.

I find NYC very livable. And limiting housing construction would not increase affordability, obviously. (PS: nobody every said that increasing density is all that's needed, but the converse -- being paranoidly anti-developer -- is only going to hurt, not help.)

You obviously don't have kids.

I have relatives raising kids in Brooklyn. Not sure how you can argue against 2 subway stops within 5 minutes, grocery store down the block, public school on the same block, Prospect Park 10 minutes away, Brooklyn library, etc etc etc ...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay this has devolved into a debate over development.

The topic at hand is "Is Greater Greater Washington a news source"

That's easy. No. It's a blog written from a pro-developer perspective. Read the Post or a real news source.

Almost every single post up there now is about transit. Not sure how that's "pro-developer."