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 06-26-2016, 04:31 PM
 
4,369 posts, read 3,722,549 times
Reputation: 2479

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by WanderingFar View Post
Except he's talking about using tax-payer dollars and building on top of protected green space. That's the difference. I'm not talking about "preventing" others from doing anything. But why should we have to subsidize it? I want to live in a mansion in Palo Alto but I'm not demanding Zuckerberg buy me one. Public funds should be used the most responsibly, for the greatest good.
This wouldn't cost taxpayers a dime. In fact government MAKES money off the sale of land
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-26-2016, 04:50 PM
 
Location: Planet Earth
677 posts, read 835,265 times
Reputation: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by WanderingFar View Post
Except he's talking about using tax-payer dollars and building on top of protected green space. That's the difference. I'm not talking about "preventing" others from doing anything. But why should we have to subsidize it? I want to live in a mansion in Palo Alto but I'm not demanding Zuckerberg buy me one. Public funds should be used the most responsibly, for the greatest good.
There would be no need to build on top of protected green space if we just razed all the old single family homes taking up and wasting valuable land and built high-density, high-rise housing on top of that land instead.

Like I said, SFH homeowners who advocate protecting green space are nothing but a bunch of hypocrites. How about protecting the green space your own home sits on? No, you have your own home built on top of green space but you want to prevent others from building their own homes on top of green space as well. If you guys were genuinely for protecting green space then why not start by razing your homes and turning the land back into green space? I'm not holding my breath that will ever happen. Hypocrites.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-26-2016, 04:54 PM
 
4,369 posts, read 3,722,549 times
Reputation: 2479
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGreatCurve View Post
There would be no need to build on top of protected green space if we just razed all the old single family homes taking up and wasting valuable land and built high-density, high-rise housing on top of that land instead.

Like I said, SFH homeowners who advocate protecting green space are nothing but a bunch of hypocrites. How about protecting the green space your own home sits on? No, you have your own home built on top of green space but you want to prevent others from building their own homes on top of green space as well. If you guys were genuinely for protecting green space then why not start by razing your homes and turning the land back into green space? I'm not holding my breath that will ever happen. Hypocrites.
The grass in my backyard is green enough for me. I hate the green space
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-26-2016, 09:29 PM
 
473 posts, read 520,941 times
Reputation: 1034
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perma Bear View Post
This wouldn't cost taxpayers a dime. In fact government MAKES money off the sale of land
Yeah, but they could make a lot more selling to private developers building market rate homes. But I actually find your residency requirements to be the most ludicrous. Why weren't you smart enough to buy two decades ago?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-26-2016, 10:40 PM
 
4,369 posts, read 3,722,549 times
Reputation: 2479
Quote:
Originally Posted by WanderingFar View Post
Yeah, but they could make a lot more selling to private developers building market rate homes. But I actually find your residency requirements to be the most ludicrous. Why weren't you smart enough to buy two decades ago?
Because I wasn't old enough to buy a house.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-27-2016, 01:13 AM
 
3,098 posts, read 3,784,341 times
Reputation: 2580
the bay area does not have a regional public transportation infrastructure to support dense high rise building
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-27-2016, 01:34 AM
 
4,369 posts, read 3,722,549 times
Reputation: 2479
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssmaster View Post
the bay area does not have a regional public transportation infrastructure to support dense high rise building
And I don't have a stab proof vest for riding public transportation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-27-2016, 12:38 PM
 
Location: Planet Earth
677 posts, read 835,265 times
Reputation: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssmaster View Post
the bay area does not have a regional public transportation infrastructure to support dense high rise building
That's the chicken and egg issue. Once you have the high-density housing, then it makes more sense to invest in the public transportation infrastructure. They will never build the transportation infrastructure without the housing density first because it's not economically viable otherwise. You have to start somewhere. That's how all major cities with great public transportation systems developed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-27-2016, 01:34 PM
 
Location: Planet Earth
677 posts, read 835,265 times
Reputation: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perma Bear View Post
And I don't have a stab proof vest for riding public transportation.
If you ride public transportation and you don't stab other people, why would others who ride public transportation, most of whom will be professionals with good jobs who earn more money than you, stab other people?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-27-2016, 01:43 PM
 
4,369 posts, read 3,722,549 times
Reputation: 2479
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGreatCurve View Post
If you ride public transportation and you don't stab other people, why would others who ride public transportation, most of whom will be professionals with good jobs who earn more money than you, stab other people?
Because you're deluded if you think high income people ride public transportation proportionally more than hobos or low income people
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:11 PM.

© 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