Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nimbys are the worst. Seriously. You’re ruining this country.

How is this ruining the country? Because people need to live in areas that comport with their affordability instead of the government trying to get everyone a prize at the expense of current homeowners? No one has a right to live in Arlington. It’s a very nice and expensive place.

I would love a house in Newport Beach. I can’t afford a $8M house so I don’t live there.

because EVERYTHING that is a common good gets opposed by NIMBYs. Preschools, high schools, sidewalks, solar powed, waste treatment plants …

The best thing for the common hood would be for people to understand that if you want something nice in this country you have to sacrifice and work your tail off. In an era of student loan forgiveness, free housing for illegal immigrants, and countless other government giveaways it’s gotten totally out of control.

How does someone sacrifice and “work their tail off” for sidewalks and wind farms? That’s total disingenuous NIMBY bullsh*t. You don’t believe people need to work for themselves - if you did, you’d never try to legally block what they do with *their own property.* What you want is to control what happens to property and public spaces that you *never worked for*. So stfu about “hard work.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nimbys are the worst. Seriously. You’re ruining this country.

How is this ruining the country? Because people need to live in areas that comport with their affordability instead of the government trying to get everyone a prize at the expense of current homeowners? No one has a right to live in Arlington. It’s a very nice and expensive place.

I would love a house in Newport Beach. I can’t afford a $8M house so I don’t live there.

because EVERYTHING that is a common good gets opposed by NIMBYs. Preschools, high schools, sidewalks, solar powed, waste treatment plants …

I agree to some extent. All for solar, better infrastructure, etc but eliminating SFH zoning is not needed. There is plenty of room to build up - apts, condos, etc. people here just look down on those types of homes. Everywhere Else in the world, a condo is a fine place to live. Wealthier people live in the larger suburban homes, most live in condos/apts. le

But the choices should not be limited to 1000 sqft condo or 4000 sqft SFH. It would be nice to have more housing in the middle.

So maybe you need to do what the rest of us did and buy a small 1.5 bath colonial fixer-upper or a small 2 bed ranch with an original kitchen and bath? Only the new construction is 4000 sqft for a SFH. And consider existing duplexes and townhomes in South Arlington, also like we did. Put in some sweat equity and make a profit.

But if MM stands, all those existing homes will be torn down to make way for new construction that is unaffordable to anyone in the middle, regardless of sqft. Whether it’s a 4000 sqft SFH or a six-plex, it’s not going to make a real dent in affordability or the regional housing crisis with a cap of 50 per year. It’s just enough to piss off current residents when parking and tree canopy and storm water and school crowding aren’t addressed simultaneously. We need many, many more high rises in the R-B corridor and “National Landing” and there’s lots of office space that is sitting empty that could make an actual dent in housing and affordability and transit access without upsetting the entire SFH resident owner population. Unless, of course, you’re not actually interested in solving these issues.

Thanks for the suggestions but I already have a house in Arlington. But I also am aware that housing in the middle is limited. Any lot suitable for a new build is already bought by a developer, and I’d rather see a duplex be constructed than a hideous McMansion.

I think if they’d just done duplexes there wouldn’t have even been a lawsuit. But the six-plexes approved for 5000 sqft lots was pure stupidity. That means no dedicated space for parking and who wants a dumpster next door when you didn’t buy in an area that ever had dumpsters before or where you suddenly have to fight for street parking? Of course it ended this way. Better to refocus energy on changing rules for lot coverage and make storm water regulations/non-permeable coverage limits so stringent and expensive that it’s not worth it for developers to prevent this McMansion spread and tree destruction.

As a current Arlington homeowner, I don’t want to dumpy duplex next to me either! If I was fine with that, I would have lived in a more populated area of Arlington, not in my nice quiet neighborhood where I am now.

They’d be new construction, and not dumpy at all. You might not like it, but it’s not really going to change your neighborhood or impact your life. Have you seen the few that have been built? You can hardly tell they are duplexes, and each one has a garage and driveway (on a corner lot the main door, garage, and driveway aren’t even on the same street). A six-plex, however, would really alter the nature of things on a SFH street, especially on the small lots that have no space to add any off-street parking. I think the lawsuit was more about this than a duplex. But, whatever, there won’t be either, so the YIMBYs need to refocus on repurposing the empty office space in Metro corridors to housing. If housing is what this is all about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nimbys are the worst. Seriously. You’re ruining this country.

How is this ruining the country? Because people need to live in areas that comport with their affordability instead of the government trying to get everyone a prize at the expense of current homeowners? No one has a right to live in Arlington. It’s a very nice and expensive place.

I would love a house in Newport Beach. I can’t afford a $8M house so I don’t live there.

because EVERYTHING that is a common good gets opposed by NIMBYs. Preschools, high schools, sidewalks, solar powed, waste treatment plants …

The best thing for the common hood would be for people to understand that if you want something nice in this country you have to sacrifice and work your tail off. In an era of student loan forgiveness, free housing for illegal immigrants, and countless other government giveaways it’s gotten totally out of control.

This is why there is a huge disconnect with some liberals in Arlington, extremely socially liberal, but also believe what you said above that you should work hard to get to where you are and should enjoy the benefits of that hard work. They’re happy to donate their hard earned money to those less fortunate, but don’t want them living next-door.

It’s not surprising that a generation of young people who grew up getting participation trophies would have no shame in thinking they deserve to live in close-in high income neighborhoods. The lack of self awareness is galling.

Devils advocate, why does someone who can’t afford it think they should “deserve” to live in a particular neighborhood?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nimbys are the worst. Seriously. You’re ruining this country.

How is this ruining the country? Because people need to live in areas that comport with their affordability instead of the government trying to get everyone a prize at the expense of current homeowners? No one has a right to live in Arlington. It’s a very nice and expensive place.

I would love a house in Newport Beach. I can’t afford a $8M house so I don’t live there.

because EVERYTHING that is a common good gets opposed by NIMBYs. Preschools, high schools, sidewalks, solar powed, waste treatment plants …

I agree to some extent. All for solar, better infrastructure, etc but eliminating SFH zoning is not needed. There is plenty of room to build up - apts, condos, etc. people here just look down on those types of homes. Everywhere Else in the world, a condo is a fine place to live. Wealthier people live in the larger suburban homes, most live in condos/apts. le

But the choices should not be limited to 1000 sqft condo or 4000 sqft SFH. It would be nice to have more housing in the middle.

So maybe you need to do what the rest of us did and buy a small 1.5 bath colonial fixer-upper or a small 2 bed ranch with an original kitchen and bath? Only the new construction is 4000 sqft for a SFH. And consider existing duplexes and townhomes in South Arlington, also like we did. Put in some sweat equity and make a profit.

But if MM stands, all those existing homes will be torn down to make way for new construction that is unaffordable to anyone in the middle, regardless of sqft. Whether it’s a 4000 sqft SFH or a six-plex, it’s not going to make a real dent in affordability or the regional housing crisis with a cap of 50 per year. It’s just enough to piss off current residents when parking and tree canopy and storm water and school crowding aren’t addressed simultaneously. We need many, many more high rises in the R-B corridor and “National Landing” and there’s lots of office space that is sitting empty that could make an actual dent in housing and affordability and transit access without upsetting the entire SFH resident owner population. Unless, of course, you’re not actually interested in solving these issues.

Thanks for the suggestions but I already have a house in Arlington. But I also am aware that housing in the middle is limited. Any lot suitable for a new build is already bought by a developer, and I’d rather see a duplex be constructed than a hideous McMansion.

I think if they’d just done duplexes there wouldn’t have even been a lawsuit. But the six-plexes approved for 5000 sqft lots was pure stupidity. That means no dedicated space for parking and who wants a dumpster next door when you didn’t buy in an area that ever had dumpsters before or where you suddenly have to fight for street parking? Of course it ended this way. Better to refocus energy on changing rules for lot coverage and make storm water regulations/non-permeable coverage limits so stringent and expensive that it’s not worth it for developers to prevent this McMansion spread and tree destruction.

As a current Arlington homeowner, I don’t want to dumpy duplex next to me either! If I was fine with that, I would have lived in a more populated area of Arlington, not in my nice quiet neighborhood where I am now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nimbys are the worst. Seriously. You’re ruining this country.

How is this ruining the country? Because people need to live in areas that comport with their affordability instead of the government trying to get everyone a prize at the expense of current homeowners? No one has a right to live in Arlington. It’s a very nice and expensive place.

I would love a house in Newport Beach. I can’t afford a $8M house so I don’t live there.

because EVERYTHING that is a common good gets opposed by NIMBYs. Preschools, high schools, sidewalks, solar powed, waste treatment plants …

The best thing for the common hood would be for people to understand that if you want something nice in this country you have to sacrifice and work your tail off. In an era of student loan forgiveness, free housing for illegal immigrants, and countless other government giveaways it’s gotten totally out of control.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nimbys are the worst. Seriously. You’re ruining this country.

How is this ruining the country? Because people need to live in areas that comport with their affordability instead of the government trying to get everyone a prize at the expense of current homeowners? No one has a right to live in Arlington. It’s a very nice and expensive place.

I would love a house in Newport Beach. I can’t afford a $8M house so I don’t live there.

because EVERYTHING that is a common good gets opposed by NIMBYs. Preschools, high schools, sidewalks, solar powed, waste treatment plants …

I agree to some extent. All for solar, better infrastructure, etc but eliminating SFH zoning is not needed. There is plenty of room to build up - apts, condos, etc. people here just look down on those types of homes. Everywhere Else in the world, a condo is a fine place to live. Wealthier people live in the larger suburban homes, most live in condos/apts. le

But the choices should not be limited to 1000 sqft condo or 4000 sqft SFH. It would be nice to have more housing in the middle.

So maybe you need to do what the rest of us did and buy a small 1.5 bath colonial fixer-upper or a small 2 bed ranch with an original kitchen and bath? Only the new construction is 4000 sqft for a SFH. And consider existing duplexes and townhomes in South Arlington, also like we did. Put in some sweat equity and make a profit.

But if MM stands, all those existing homes will be torn down to make way for new construction that is unaffordable to anyone in the middle, regardless of sqft. Whether it’s a 4000 sqft SFH or a six-plex, it’s not going to make a real dent in affordability or the regional housing crisis with a cap of 50 per year. It’s just enough to piss off current residents when parking and tree canopy and storm water and school crowding aren’t addressed simultaneously. We need many, many more high rises in the R-B corridor and “National Landing” and there’s lots of office space that is sitting empty that could make an actual dent in housing and affordability and transit access without upsetting the entire SFH resident owner population. Unless, of course, you’re not actually interested in solving these issues.

Thanks for the suggestions but I already have a house in Arlington. But I also am aware that housing in the middle is limited. Any lot suitable for a new build is already bought by a developer, and I’d rather see a duplex be constructed than a hideous McMansion.

I think if they’d just done duplexes there wouldn’t have even been a lawsuit. But the six-plexes approved for 5000 sqft lots was pure stupidity. That means no dedicated space for parking and who wants a dumpster next door when you didn’t buy in an area that ever had dumpsters before or where you suddenly have to fight for street parking? Of course it ended this way. Better to refocus energy on changing rules for lot coverage and make storm water regulations/non-permeable coverage limits so stringent and expensive that it’s not worth it for developers to prevent this McMansion spread and tree destruction.

As a current Arlington homeowner, I don’t want to dumpy duplex next to me either! If I was fine with that, I would have lived in a more populated area of Arlington, not in my nice quiet neighborhood where I am now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nimbys are the worst. Seriously. You’re ruining this country.

How is this ruining the country? Because people need to live in areas that comport with their affordability instead of the government trying to get everyone a prize at the expense of current homeowners? No one has a right to live in Arlington. It’s a very nice and expensive place.

I would love a house in Newport Beach. I can’t afford a $8M house so I don’t live there.

because EVERYTHING that is a common good gets opposed by NIMBYs. Preschools, high schools, sidewalks, solar powed, waste treatment plants …

None of this is true for Arlington. There were arguments about the high school, but not because people didn’t want it in their backyard but because they wanted a school that was equivalent to the existing high schools like W-L, Yorktown and Wakefield and the County, per usual, wouldn’t do that. They forced all these other 1/2 a$$ options on people. I’d love to hear about the preschool and solar power that Arlington NIMBYs scrapped. I’ve lived here over twenty years.

lol pathetic defense of blocking the HS. I bet you $10000 the same people who blocked the HS are now whining about not having enough school capacity for growth.

Pathetic defense? You must be a delusional YIMBY renter without kids. Because you would care if your kid was zoned for a high school with a small turf field on the roof and no swimming pool or theater while kids at the other high schools have all of those things. I have no dog in this fight. I am a parent of high school student but I wouldn’t send them to APS. The County and their schools suck.

Catch up. The NIMBYs blocked the a new APS HS (and now whine that the schools are too crowded for more housing.)

It’s almost like you are purposely obtuse. I just explained why it was blocked. It’s YIMBY’s like you who can’t make a coherent argument that got us into this mess.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nimbys are the worst. Seriously. You’re ruining this country.

How is this ruining the country? Because people need to live in areas that comport with their affordability instead of the government trying to get everyone a prize at the expense of current homeowners? No one has a right to live in Arlington. It’s a very nice and expensive place.

I would love a house in Newport Beach. I can’t afford a $8M house so I don’t live there.

because EVERYTHING that is a common good gets opposed by NIMBYs. Preschools, high schools, sidewalks, solar powed, waste treatment plants …

The best thing for the common hood would be for people to understand that if you want something nice in this country you have to sacrifice and work your tail off. In an era of student loan forgiveness, free housing for illegal immigrants, and countless other government giveaways it’s gotten totally out of control.

This is why there is a huge disconnect with some liberals in Arlington, extremely socially liberal, but also believe what you said above that you should work hard to get to where you are and should enjoy the benefits of that hard work. They’re happy to donate their hard earned money to those less fortunate, but don’t want them living next-door.

It’s not surprising that a generation of young people who grew up getting participation trophies would have no shame in thinking they deserve to live in close-in high income neighborhoods. The lack of self awareness is galling.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nimbys are the worst. Seriously. You’re ruining this country.

How is this ruining the country? Because people need to live in areas that comport with their affordability instead of the government trying to get everyone a prize at the expense of current homeowners? No one has a right to live in Arlington. It’s a very nice and expensive place.

I would love a house in Newport Beach. I can’t afford a $8M house so I don’t live there.

because EVERYTHING that is a common good gets opposed by NIMBYs. Preschools, high schools, sidewalks, solar powed, waste treatment plants …

The best thing for the common hood would be for people to understand that if you want something nice in this country you have to sacrifice and work your tail off. In an era of student loan forgiveness, free housing for illegal immigrants, and countless other government giveaways it’s gotten totally out of control.

This is why there is a huge disconnect with some liberals in Arlington, extremely socially liberal, but also believe what you said above that you should work hard to get to where you are and should enjoy the benefits of that hard work. They’re happy to donate their hard earned money to those less fortunate, but don’t want them living next-door.

It’s not surprising that a generation of young people who grew up getting participation trophies would have no shame in thinking they deserve to live in close-in high income neighborhoods. The lack of self awareness is galling.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nimbys are the worst. Seriously. You’re ruining this country.

How is this ruining the country? Because people need to live in areas that comport with their affordability instead of the government trying to get everyone a prize at the expense of current homeowners? No one has a right to live in Arlington. It’s a very nice and expensive place.

I would love a house in Newport Beach. I can’t afford a $8M house so I don’t live there.

because EVERYTHING that is a common good gets opposed by NIMBYs. Preschools, high schools, sidewalks, solar powed, waste treatment plants …

The best thing for the common hood would be for people to understand that if you want something nice in this country you have to sacrifice and work your tail off. In an era of student loan forgiveness, free housing for illegal immigrants, and countless other government giveaways it’s gotten totally out of control.

This is why there is a huge disconnect with some liberals in Arlington, extremely socially liberal, but also believe what you said above that you should work hard to get to where you are and should enjoy the benefits of that hard work. They’re happy to donate their hard earned money to those less fortunate, but don’t want them living next-door.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nimbys are the worst. Seriously. You’re ruining this country.

How is this ruining the country? Because people need to live in areas that comport with their affordability instead of the government trying to get everyone a prize at the expense of current homeowners? No one has a right to live in Arlington. It’s a very nice and expensive place.

I would love a house in Newport Beach. I can’t afford a $8M house so I don’t live there.

because EVERYTHING that is a common good gets opposed by NIMBYs. Preschools, high schools, sidewalks, solar powed, waste treatment plants …

The best thing for the common hood would be for people to understand that if you want something nice in this country you have to sacrifice and work your tail off. In an era of student loan forgiveness, free housing for illegal immigrants, and countless other government giveaways it’s gotten totally out of control.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nimbys are the worst. Seriously. You’re ruining this country.

How is this ruining the country? Because people need to live in areas that comport with their affordability instead of the government trying to get everyone a prize at the expense of current homeowners? No one has a right to live in Arlington. It’s a very nice and expensive place.

I would love a house in Newport Beach. I can’t afford a $8M house so I don’t live there.

because EVERYTHING that is a common good gets opposed by NIMBYs. Preschools, high schools, sidewalks, solar powed, waste treatment plants …

I agree to some extent. All for solar, better infrastructure, etc but eliminating SFH zoning is not needed. There is plenty of room to build up - apts, condos, etc. people here just look down on those types of homes. Everywhere Else in the world, a condo is a fine place to live. Wealthier people live in the larger suburban homes, most live in condos/apts. le

But the choices should not be limited to 1000 sqft condo or 4000 sqft SFH. It would be nice to have more housing in the middle.

So maybe you need to do what the rest of us did and buy a small 1.5 bath colonial fixer-upper or a small 2 bed ranch with an original kitchen and bath? Only the new construction is 4000 sqft for a SFH. And consider existing duplexes and townhomes in South Arlington, also like we did. Put in some sweat equity and make a profit.

But if MM stands, all those existing homes will be torn down to make way for new construction that is unaffordable to anyone in the middle, regardless of sqft. Whether it’s a 4000 sqft SFH or a six-plex, it’s not going to make a real dent in affordability or the regional housing crisis with a cap of 50 per year. It’s just enough to piss off current residents when parking and tree canopy and storm water and school crowding aren’t addressed simultaneously. We need many, many more high rises in the R-B corridor and “National Landing” and there’s lots of office space that is sitting empty that could make an actual dent in housing and affordability and transit access without upsetting the entire SFH resident owner population. Unless, of course, you’re not actually interested in solving these issues.

Thanks for the suggestions but I already have a house in Arlington. But I also am aware that housing in the middle is limited. Any lot suitable for a new build is already bought by a developer, and I’d rather see a duplex be constructed than a hideous McMansion.

I think if they’d just done duplexes there wouldn’t have even been a lawsuit. But the six-plexes approved for 5000 sqft lots was pure stupidity. That means no dedicated space for parking and who wants a dumpster next door when you didn’t buy in an area that ever had dumpsters before or where you suddenly have to fight for street parking? Of course it ended this way. Better to refocus energy on changing rules for lot coverage and make storm water regulations/non-permeable coverage limits so stringent and expensive that it’s not worth it for developers to prevent this McMansion spread and tree destruction.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nimbys are the worst. Seriously. You’re ruining this country.

How is this ruining the country? Because people need to live in areas that comport with their affordability instead of the government trying to get everyone a prize at the expense of current homeowners? No one has a right to live in Arlington. It’s a very nice and expensive place.

I would love a house in Newport Beach. I can’t afford a $8M house so I don’t live there.

because EVERYTHING that is a common good gets opposed by NIMBYs. Preschools, high schools, sidewalks, solar powed, waste treatment plants …

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nimbys are the worst. Seriously. You’re ruining this country.

How is this ruining the country? Because people need to live in areas that comport with their affordability instead of the government trying to get everyone a prize at the expense of current homeowners? No one has a right to live in Arlington. It’s a very nice and expensive place.

I would love a house in Newport Beach. I can’t afford a $8M house so I don’t live there.

because EVERYTHING that is a common good gets opposed by NIMBYs. Preschools, high schools, sidewalks, solar powed, waste treatment plants …

I agree to some extent. All for solar, better infrastructure, etc but eliminating SFH zoning is not needed. There is plenty of room to build up - apts, condos, etc. people here just look down on those types of homes. Everywhere Else in the world, a condo is a fine place to live. Wealthier people live in the larger suburban homes, most live in condos/apts. le

But the choices should not be limited to 1000 sqft condo or 4000 sqft SFH. It would be nice to have more housing in the middle.

So maybe you need to do what the rest of us did and buy a small 1.5 bath colonial fixer-upper or a small 2 bed ranch with an original kitchen and bath? Only the new construction is 4000 sqft for a SFH. And consider existing duplexes and townhomes in South Arlington, also like we did. Put in some sweat equity and make a profit.

But if MM stands, all those existing homes will be torn down to make way for new construction that is unaffordable to anyone in the middle, regardless of sqft. Whether it’s a 4000 sqft SFH or a six-plex, it’s not going to make a real dent in affordability or the regional housing crisis with a cap of 50 per year. It’s just enough to piss off current residents when parking and tree canopy and storm water and school crowding aren’t addressed simultaneously. We need many, many more high rises in the R-B corridor and “National Landing” and there’s lots of office space that is sitting empty that could make an actual dent in housing and affordability and transit access without upsetting the entire SFH resident owner population. Unless, of course, you’re not actually interested in solving these issues.

Thanks for the suggestions but I already have a house in Arlington. But I also am aware that housing in the middle is limited. Any lot suitable for a new build is already bought by a developer, and I’d rather see a duplex be constructed than a hideous McMansion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They basically want to turn the whole DMV into Mexico City. No, I do not mean that in a disparaging ethic way, but they’ll try to jam pack way too many people in a certain area just like Mexico City. And guess what’s happening to MC? The entire city is sinking because infrastructure can’t handle water and sewage demand. The city is going to collapse because there will be no more water.

Maybe, just maybe, not everyone has the god given right to live wherever they want, when they want. You build infrastructure up to a certain level with a limit. You can only sustain a population up to that limit. If you can’t afford to live there due to limit on capacity, then you simply find more affordable, less dense areas to live. The U.S. is massive. I don’t understand why we insist on making certain areas extremely dense when there is huge amounts of room and space elsewhere available that’s already far more affordable. You can live in PA, WV, or OH for much more affordable housing.

You can live in PA or OH if you want a massive SFH with a giant yard. You don’t get to both live close to an urban center and demand other people cannot live there.

That would work, perhaps, if the discussion was about two people looking to move, one into more density and one into less. You're telling that second person to leave their home, with all the life invested there, if they don't like your solution to accommodating the first, who plans to move from their current abode anyway.

Nobody is telling anyone to move.