Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-01-2014, 12:51 PM
 
67 posts, read 140,150 times
Reputation: 76

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by neutrino78x View Post
The lower class would have to leave also. Basically SF would become a city of the extremely wealthy, since no one else could afford to live there. I guess some people might want that, but I think the majority want SF itself and the region in general to be compatible with people of different levels of economic success to be able to live here. It is better for the economy, and better for the environment
News flash ... Wealthy people have always been able to buy things that other people haven't. If you go up against someone in an auction for something and that other person has more money, you will lose. What makes certain people think that they should get more than they can pay for?

Lower class people won't just immediately evacuate this city. Before that happens, wages at the lower levels will have to rise to compensate workers for having to commute more and more, or else the services and basic functions of the city will become less attractive to the wealthy, producing a balancing downward effect on prices.

The city can't run on techies alone, but you don't need a bunch of ham fisted laws to solve that problem ... You just need to get out of the way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-01-2014, 01:00 PM
 
Location: On the water.
21,627 posts, read 16,157,235 times
Reputation: 19703
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858 View Post
An educated workforce. Did you think it was because of the GG Bridge and weather?
Well, the weather is huge. It doesn't hurt people's desires to be here a bit. But no, it goes deeper than that. As you say, the educated, experienced workforce - also the relationships to capital funding, research centers, and more. Now, all that acknowledged, why does California dominate in those fields? Why has this state, and the Bay, developed as it has in this regard, and continue to maintain in this regard, compared to other places - like Boston, Atlanta, Omaha, Rapid City, Boise, on and on and on?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858 View Post
It's more the "shut the door behind you mentality" you and others demonstrate.
Shut what door behind me? The hatch on my sailboat? I don't own any doors here. When a place is full, it's full. If you live in a single family neighborhood and a bunch of developers want to rezone for high rise, would you just give them your keys? If you bought into a 30 unit condo project and were enjoying your retirement as you had all planned out, and the condo developers came back and said they wanted to build another 30 units in your common grounds area, would you vote "YES!"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858 View Post
Really don't see how that's what I'm advocating since I prefer more market based solutions to the housing affordability issue rather than the subsidized band-aid approach most places around here take.
The values of Bay properties, however outrageously high, have grown based on demand. Those fortunate enough to have bought long ago or inherited find themselves in a great position. Thats the luck of the draw - and for some, the skill of playing your hand. This is America and that's the kind of culture we live in. I don't defend it or condemn it. It just is what it is. If you compromise values by altering the QoL and density and character of neighborhoods, especially without the consent of those already vested in the areas, then you redistribute wealth.

Now then, in spite of our differences, you are, IMO, the only poster here making interesting and valid points and arguments. And I am curious to hear what kinds of "market based solutions" you think could help affordability.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858 View Post
You want to use the govt to over-regulate and restrict development to where it benefits your position.
So what's new in America? This is what is behind every piece of legislation in the history of our nation and states since the beginning.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858 View Post
Clearly, still doesn't mean it's a relevant topic in this local forum. As someone just suggested, maybe try the "Philosophy" forum.
And, as I suggested before, if you don't find it engaging, don't engage. The Bay Area is a perfect example of what is shaping up for generations to come. As I pointed out way back, there is a perfect storm brewing of overpopulation occurring with technological advances that reduce the need for workforce - while increasing mobility and wealth, alarmingly, for a sizeable segment of the population. Even if population were to shrink - and it is predicted to stabilize and possibly start to reverse at about the 9 billion globally mark - most of humanity strongly prefers coastal living. And the Bay area is PRIME coastal living. People who can, will continue to flock here from around the globe - in droves - with their wealth. There is no way to accommodate practically endless growth. That's the point of this thread. I fail to see how it doesn't belong in this forum.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2014, 01:06 PM
 
Location: On the water.
21,627 posts, read 16,157,235 times
Reputation: 19703
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostVector View Post
News flash ... Wealthy people have always been able to buy things that other people haven't. If you go up against someone in an auction for something and that other person has more money, you will lose. What makes certain people think that they should get more than they can pay for?

Lower class people won't just immediately evacuate this city. Before that happens, wages at the lower levels will have to rise to compensate workers for having to commute more and more, or else the services and basic functions of the city will become less attractive to the wealthy, producing a balancing downward effect on prices.

The city can't run on techies alone, but you don't need a bunch of ham fisted laws to solve that problem ... You just need to get out of the way.
Well! The very idea! The universe self regulates? Who knew?!
Yes. Stop trying to accommodate the "symptoms".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2014, 01:52 PM
 
Location: Paradise CA, that place on fire
2,001 posts, read 1,705,173 times
Reputation: 5826
"If you put everyone on earth in a place as dense as New York City, they would only take up the area of Texas. Clearly we could grow a lot more. "

That seems to me like a workable solution to the merciless overpopulating of our planet. With the rate of murder and suicides skyrocketing, that nightmarish area of Texas would eventually become like the Texas we know and admire today. If you doubt it, just cram 2 dozen rats in a tiny cage and watch the result.

Last edited by mgforshort; 07-01-2014 at 02:13 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2014, 01:57 PM
 
Location: On the water.
21,627 posts, read 16,157,235 times
Reputation: 19703
Finally a handful of realists start to post
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2014, 02:19 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
18,965 posts, read 32,492,053 times
Reputation: 13615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulemutt View Post
Well, the weather is huge. It doesn't hurt people's desires to be here a bit. But no, it goes deeper than that. As you say, the educated, experienced workforce - also the relationships to capital funding, research centers, and more. Now, all that acknowledged, why does California dominate in those fields? Why has this state, and the Bay, developed as it has in this regard, and continue to maintain in this regard, compared to other places - like Boston, Atlanta, Omaha, Rapid City, Boise, on and on and on?
Well excellent universities tend to lead to an educated workforce, so for the Bay Area I'd say Stanford and Cal probably had a role in that. Not sure why you threw Boston in with those other cities too considering it's pretty much just as educated as the Bay Area and has a pretty strong and dynamic economy as well.
Quote:
Shut what door behind me? The hatch on my sailboat? I don't own any doors here. When a place is full, it's full.
I'm sure plenty of people thought it was full before you arrived as well. Who exactly defines when a place is "full"?
Quote:
If you live in a single family neighborhood and a bunch of developers want to rezone for high rise, would you just give them your keys? If you bought into a 30 unit condo project and were enjoying your retirement as you had all planned out, and the condo developers came back and said they wanted to build another 30 units in your common grounds area, would you vote "YES!"?
If the price is right sure I might give them my keys, which is pretty much what happened around Pleasant Hill BART. The area used to be large lot single family homes, now look at it.
Quote:
The values of Bay properties, however outrageously high, have grown based on demand. Those fortunate enough to have bought long ago or inherited find themselves in a great position. Thats the luck of the draw - and for some, the skill of playing your hand. This is America and that's the kind of culture we live in. I don't defend it or condemn it. It just is what it is. If you compromise values by altering the QoL and density and character of neighborhoods, especially without the consent of those already vested in the areas, then you redistribute wealth.
Nobody is taking anything of monetary value or reducing your property values. Planning and development is a public process so I'm not sure where this "without the consent" idea comes from.
Quote:
Now then, in spite of our differences, you are, IMO, the only poster here making interesting and valid points and arguments. And I am curious to hear what kinds of "market based solutions" you think could help affordability.
More non-luxury housing in general.

Quote:
And, as I suggested before, if you don't find it engaging, don't engage. The Bay Area is a perfect example of what is shaping up for generations to come. As I pointed out way back, there is a perfect storm brewing of overpopulation occurring with technological advances that reduce the need for workforce - while increasing mobility and wealth, alarmingly, for a sizeable segment of the population. Even if population were to shrink - and it is predicted to stabilize and possibly start to reverse at about the 9 billion globally mark - most of humanity strongly prefers coastal living. And the Bay area is PRIME coastal living. People who can, will continue to flock here from around the globe - in droves - with their wealth. There is no way to accommodate practically endless growth. That's the point of this thread. I fail to see how it doesn't belong in this forum.
I'm not engaging in your debate regarding global population growth and it looks like most people aren't either probably because they realize it's not a local issue. There's mulitple forums with specific topics for a reason. If you want to talk about national or global population growth, I really don't get how you think this is the proper forum for that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2014, 02:25 PM
 
343 posts, read 443,499 times
Reputation: 150
Well Oakland for one currently isn't remotely close to being "full" Oakland's promise as solution to Bay Area's housing crunch - San Francisco Chronicle

San Francisco could be twice as dense and still not be as dense as Brooklyn, much less Manhattan. It is also obviously not "full" either
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2014, 02:26 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
18,965 posts, read 32,492,053 times
Reputation: 13615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obamadon1 View Post
Well Oakland for one currently isn't remotely close to being "full" Oakland's promise as solution to Bay Area's housing crunch - San Francisco Chronicle

San Francisco could be twice as dense and still not be as dense as Brooklyn, much less Manhattan. It is also obviously not "full" either
There's a lot of underutilized land in the Bay Area, especially next to BART stations.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2014, 02:38 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
102,094 posts, read 107,215,903 times
Reputation: 115895
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858 View Post
I'm sure plenty of people thought it was full before you arrived as well. Who exactly defines when a place is "full"?
Older relatives tell me the Bay Area, or the East Bay at least, was considered "full" already by the 80's.

You can jam more people into the square miles, but what do you do with their cars? Public transit is way behind in the Bay Area. There really hasn't been rational growth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2014, 02:51 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
18,965 posts, read 32,492,053 times
Reputation: 13615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth View Post
Older relatives tell me the Bay Area, or the East Bay at least, was considered "full" already by the 80's.

You can jam more people into the square miles, but what do you do with their cars? Public transit is way behind in the Bay Area. There really hasn't been rational growth.
I agree. Even though I don't mention it every time I talk about development, the transportation infrastructure is a vital part of that as well; land use and transportation planning go hand in hand. Unfortunately a lot of what is planned or proposed isn't built or implemented, at least not in a reasonable amount of time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top