Big Tech can't build housing units commensurate with their office growth unless the suburban peninsula govts, um, actually zone for and allow them to build midsize or large residential buildings. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ https://twitter.com/HowardKushlan/status/1103485357327212545 …
I'm generally pro-progressive and corporate taxation at the federal level and state level (though a little more particular on design at the state level), and mostly anti-Reaganist... so are you trying to create a point of disagreement?
-
-
Not creating disagreement. Your original comment was "its not a single company's job to make up for fed govt spending 1/3 of what it used to on low income housing." My guess is fed corporate taxes are also lower today. So perhaps it does now fall to local companies to step up...
-
The scale of the issue is much larger than what one company can do and creating that illusion among an electorate enables them to absolve themselves of making larger systemic changes to the way we look at land and housing. Also, at a municipal level, it’s really not the best way
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Of all the current primary candidates, I'm probably closest (on a policy front) to Warren, in terms of exploring co-determination at the board level and re-investing in public/affordable housing at the federal level.
-
but at the Palo Alto level, which is what this was originally about, I'm just trying to call out a bad faith argument for what it is -- which is that PA really struggles to zone for anything beyond single-family and has repeatedly killed low-income housing developments.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.