|
DeadlyMuffin posted:Feinstein is awful, but if that's your immediate response you're miscalibrated. She's not Manchin. The story quotes her as saying that she was going to vote to acquit and just now changed her mind, so...
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2020 19:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 01:08 |
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:The story quotes her as saying that she was going to vote to acquit and just now changed her mind, so... I'm not a Trump supporter but,
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2020 20:18
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:Feinstein is awful, but if that's your immediate response you're miscalibrated. She's not Manchin. She is a DINO who regularly sides with Republicans. She originally ran as a centrist.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2020 20:22
|
|
|
My favorite Feinstein moment was her being all gung-ho for the surveillance state until she learned that her office got bugged. Peak white lib right there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2020 20:24
|
|
|
she will be 92 when she's next up for reelection
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2020 20:28
|
|
|
I pray for her death every day.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2020 20:39
|
|
|
H.P. Hovercraft posted:she will be 92 when she's next up for reelection And she'll run and win again until the heroes can finally find and destroy her phylactery.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2020 20:40
|
|
|
I heard she eats babies
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2020 21:06
|
|
|
no no she just consumes their extracted adrenochrome
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2020 21:08
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:I'm surprised there's not aftershocks and blackouts from Di-Fi distancing herself from the right. That's what happens when ancient things shift in California. I sure wish she'd walk right into the ocean.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2020 21:38
|
|
|
SB 50 (housing crisis bill that makes upzoning near transit easier) is up for a vote in the senate right now!
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2020 23:08
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/mlevinreports/status/1222656050651746304 https://twitter.com/mlevinreports/status/1222659689357271041
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 00:17
|
|
|
I swear to god this poo poo better loving pass. I would really like to not have to live with a roommate forever for the sake of protecting Orinda boomers property values.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 00:54
|
|
|
Think it just passed 17-14?? God, our Senate is so small. Merge the houses and switch to 60 three-member districts, imo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 01:00
|
|
|
It’s on hold. They have until Friday to find three more votes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 01:05
|
|
|
Kill Bristol posted:I swear to god this poo poo better loving pass. I would really like to not have to live with a roommate forever for the sake of protecting Orinda boomers property values. Got bad news on the prospect of this giving you affordable housing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 01:07
|
|
|
I mean it won’t fix everything but lol if you don’t think that the housing crisis is at least partially related to how insanely little housing this state builds compared to how fast we’ve added people/jobs the last couple decades.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 01:12
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Got bad news on the prospect of this giving you affordable housing. You just posted what I was gonna say. I have some bad news about California friend.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 01:12
|
|
|
So what are all the SoCal senators mad about? Is this just appealing to NIMBY's or is there something else going on?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 01:13
|
|
|
It’s appealing to NIMBYs and their front groups, yeah. At lot of them are up for election as county supes this cycle and NIMBYs vote in local elections. Goddamnit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 01:15
|
|
|
SB50 is bad, it's market worshipping horseshit made to hand over more public space to developers to build condos that sit empty while the homeless camp in tents outside
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 01:17
|
|
|
“If shortage, why appartment empty?” is the “If global warming, why cold outside?” of housing discourse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 01:24
|
|
|
Kill Bristol posted:I mean it won’t fix everything but lol if you don’t think that the housing crisis is at least partially related to how insanely little housing this state builds compared to how fast we’ve added people/jobs the last couple decades. That's not the question. The question is whether SB50 is going to actually address that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 01:28
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:I heard she eats babies She just snatches them. Her criminal husband eats them between stealing from the UCs and stealing from USPS.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 01:32
|
|
|
Centrist Committee posted:SB50 is bad, it's market worshipping horseshit made to hand over more public space to developers to build condos that sit empty while the homeless camp in tents outside Thanks for the update from nextdoor dot com
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 01:35
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:That's not the question. I don’t see how making it easier to change the insane single family zoning of many places, which was specially in many cases put in to stop poorer people/minorities from living there, could possibly make it harder to build new housing. Like what’s the alternative? I think we should build millions more units of public housing, but that’s a “First, the revolution” type solution. Currently our entire housing/zoning/tax infrastructure is biased against density and towards pampering boomer homeowners. Anything that changes that is a good thing. Fill Baptismal fucked around with this message at 01:40 on Jan 30, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 01:36
|
|
|
Kill Bristol posted:I mean it won’t fix everything but lol if you don’t think that the housing crisis is at least partially related to how insanely little housing this state builds compared to how fast we’ve added people/jobs the last couple decades. it's a giveaway to developers, who will make the most expensive housing they can, thus not dropping prices. it's not in your self-interest.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 01:36
|
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:it's a giveaway to developers, who will make the most expensive housing they can, thus not dropping prices. it's not in your self-interest. it's meant to facilitate infill in areas already occupied by lower-density housing in the vicinity of transit the restrictive zoning that's currently in effect in these areas is just as much of a barrier to any kinda public housing as it is to any other sort of development
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 01:40
|
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:it's a giveaway to developers, who will make the most expensive housing they can, thus not dropping prices. it's not in your self-interest. As someone who currently spends about half my paycheck on rent, it pretty clearly is in my interest for housing supply to increase. Even if “it’s all luxury housing” were true (its not), rich people moving into new luxury housing rather than competing for places to live with the rest of us in a tight market is A Good Thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 01:44
|
|
|
Spazzle posted:Thanks for the update from nextdoor dot com The nextdoor post would be complaining about how there's not enough parking spaces, how it better not be public housing, and "i wish the city would just clear out those camps". Doc Hawkins posted:it's a giveaway to developers, who will make the most expensive housing they can, thus not dropping prices. it's not in your self-interest. Correct. And there's nothing to get them to build any quicker than they're doing now. It might get some more housing built. A bit. Not nearly enough to move the needle. That's why actual groups that are worried about affordable housing opposed it last time, and this time. There's tons of space right now that could be built more densely. Developers aren't building there. Kill Bristol posted:As someone who currently spends about half my paycheck on rent, it pretty clearly is in my interest for housing supply to increase. Even if “it’s all luxury housing” were true (its not), rich people moving into new luxury housing rather than competing for places to live with the rest of us in a tight market is A Good Thing. Not if those luxury units aren't getting built faster than demand rises. However you're precisely the person bill is designed to fool, so I guess that works.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 01:46
|
|
|
That flies in the face of the actual evidence, which is that places that issue more permits and build more housing per capita are actually more affordable to live in. Seriously, it’s indefensible that places like Beverly Hills or orinda are majority zoned for single family only.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 01:51
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Not if those luxury units aren't getting built faster than demand rises. wE cAn'T bUiLd OuR wAy OuT oF tHiS hOuSiNg CrIsIs
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 01:52
|
|
|
We must defend at all costs that historic tool of liberation and the working class, single family suburban zoning ✊.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 01:55
|
|
|
Kill Bristol posted:That flies in the face of the actual evidence, which is that places that issue more permits and build more housing per capita are actually more affordable to live in. Seriously, it’s indefensible that places like Beverly Hills or orinda are majority zoned for single family only. Anywhere you can build high in BH is already built that way. There's big apartment buildings anywhere near where the Purple is going to run because having a BH address means you can charge 5k for a studio. The mansion areas aren't going to become high rises. What's probably going to happen is people are going to get gentrified out of Inglewood like is already happening. H.P. Hovercraft posted:wE cAn'T bUiLd OuR wAy OuT oF tHiS hOuSiNg CrIsIs We totally can. Are you dying to find some sort of Nimby to yell at or what
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 02:01
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Anywhere you can build high in BH is already built that way. Yes, that’s the point. Let’s change zoning so that you can build high in more places!
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 02:04
|
|
|
Kill Bristol posted:rich people moving into new luxury housing rather than competing for places to live with the rest of us in a tight market is A Good Thing. https://laist.com/2019/11/20/los-angeles-housing-vacancy-homeless.php quote:...
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 02:07
|
|
|
Kill Bristol posted:Yes, that’s the point. Let’s change zoning so that you can build high in more places! That's not what's stopping high buildings in LA, for instance. There's tons of places developers can already do that. They aren't. What does this bill do that would make them?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 02:13
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:Except thats not what happens. A lot of those are collected and left empty and and do nothing for you. As long as the richest people both A) have unlimited money, and B)can use "housing" as a way to park and increase their unlimited money, then developers are building places to be collected not lived in. This is a misleading statistic. If you look at the vacancy rate for the bay or LA area, it’s far below the rest of the country. A few thousands units being vacant doesn’t change that. And the reason that it’s profitable to have vacant units is because a tight market means you can bet on them growing in value. I mean if you’re arguing that we should have a vacancy tax, yeah sure, I’m ambivalent in whether or not it would have a huge effect, but it can’t hurt at this point. But there’s no way around the fact that we need more housing. Jaxyon posted:That's not what's stopping high buildings in LA, for instance. Something like 75% of LA is zoned for single family only. Fill Baptismal fucked around with this message at 02:20 on Jan 30, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 02:16
|
|
|
Kill Bristol posted:But there’s no way around the fact that we need more housing. How does this bill get you that? Do you think McMansions up in Holmby Hills are why my apartment doubled in rent at the same time as high-rise apartments grew like weeds in downtown?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 02:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 01:08 |
|
|
Kill Bristol posted:As someone who currently spends about half my paycheck on rent, it pretty clearly is in my interest for housing supply to increase. Even if “it’s all luxury housing” were true (its not), rich people moving into new luxury housing rather than competing for places to live with the rest of us in a tight market is A Good Thing. on the other hand, the actual market, real history, etc Jaxyon posted:However you're precisely the person bill is designed to fool, so I guess that works. the good news is that a lot of people and groups don't like the bill, and now they get to punish Weiner by endorsing Jackie Fielder, who puts it much more politely than I would: "Urbanist pro-housing allies need to do a better job of listening to low income people and people of color before legislating or advocating on their behalf."
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 02:27
|
|