Reply to So does everything have to be YIMBY vs NIMBY now?

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "So does everything have to be YIMBY vs NIMBY now? "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]This is a GREAT podcast on the housing debate, and why we are failing to provide affordable housing in blue states in particular.  A lot of it has to do with super-strict building regulation, but a lot of it is the power of NIMBYs.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/19/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-jenny-schuetz.html?referringSource=articleShare

I voted Blair for jobs and public safety.   I really don't care about housing. [/quote]
YIMBYs are basically a libertarian, deregulation movement. Which is fine, but that’s what they are. To they extent that there is an issue with housing production, it’s not so much regulation as it is finance. After the Global Financial Crisis builders stopped building and not because they cannot, but because they are more careful now about managing supply to maximize their profits and manage downside risk. Any discussion about housing that doesn’t mention this is not an honest discussion.

[img]https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F67f58fe7-36c8-44e5-acf1-d743ff499783_1017x683.png[/img][/quote]

YMBY is not a libertarian movement.

It is a movement that understands that the racist roots of much of the single family zoning has artificially inflated the cost of land and homes. It is a movement that recognizes that the zoning regime and historic preservation has been weaponized to maintain a classist status quo.

[/quote]

Of course. Racist!!!  SFH are racist.  People who live in them - racist!   What a crock full of sh!t.   [/quote]

The exclusionary land use and practice of racial and religious covenants associated with the creation and construction of many DC nieghborhoods was in fact racist.

The continuing protection of the status quo of said single family neighborhoods, is, in fact, exclusionary.

These are facts.
[/quote]

No.  While the history may be right, no neighborhoods are exclusionary.  Folks of all colors can live wherever they can afford to.    [/quote]

And as we all know, there is absolutely no correlation in this country between race and income/wealth, so definitely high housing prices have no effect on the demographics of the neighborhood.

(The term exclusionary zoning isn't necessarily only referring to race, anyway; the point is that it excludes all but a certain income level.)[/quote]

This is pure nonsense that the GGW/YIMBY/developer stans peddle, when regular people dont even have issue with it.

"I'd like a 5 bedroom in Bethesda, but I make 60,000/yr, therefore Bethesda is "exclusionary".   Give me a f-ing break.

Anyone with the money to live there, can live there.   Same as any other neighborhood in 2022.   Peddle your race baiting, developer carrying water elsewhere, please.

[/quote]

I think housing should be a right, not an investment or a commodity, and I'd rather that affordable housing was built and owned by the city, with no profit for developers, so I'm not carrying water for the construction or real estate industries, But it's a simple fact that saying "anyone with the money to live there can live there" ignores massive disparities in wealth and income tied to race. And zoning that only allows construction of single-family homes that sell for close to $2 million excludes a lot of people.[/quote]

So what? Go live somewhere else. No one owes you a home in Bethesda. [/quote]

I own a house in AU Park. I just don't think only people who have as much money as I do should be able to afford to do the same.
[/quote]
If you want to live in a neighborhood with less affluent people why not just move to a less affluent area?

I’m confused why you think the answer is to remake a whole neighborhood to fit your pet interest instead of you moving. One thing seems a lot easier than the other. [/quote]

It's not that living in mixed-income neighborhoods is my hobby; I have lived in lower-income neighborhoods before this one. It's that I think it would be better for society as a whole if this neighborhood wasn't the exclusive domain of rich people, and if housing affordability wasn't largely a function of the market.[/quote]

Because maybe people who live in those areas do not share your "vision."  Moreover, by focusing on those areas, you are not improving the areas that really need improvement.  Improving the less "desirable" areas thru better infrastructure and better housing makes more sense.  Bring up the rear![/quote]

Yes, I'd love to see better housing and better infrastructure everywhere, especially if there are guarantees in place that people who already live in "the less 'desirable' areas" that you call the rear are able to remain in their homes if they'd like to even after significant investment there. But would you believe it's actually possible to build new housing in more than one place at a time?[/quote]
Not according to YIMBYs. Y’all whine so much. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics