there is a left pro-supply position. But current politics have made negotiating every project the only way to get benefits.
-
-
Replying to @natogreen
Nope. Processes that incentivize project by project protest and blocking were seen as the goal in the past. Not means to end.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @ValisJason
not sure what you're saying. The left just wants the best deal possible out of any project. Not us killing Brisbane Baylands.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @natogreen
Want to see consensus that city needs massive amounts of supply at all levels, and that can be win-win for us all.
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @ValisJason
well we're not convinced of that and people who think it keep waving away critical questions. But we can negotiate.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @natogreen
That's my point. That's a zero sum mindset. Focus on sense that "critical questions" on every project be answered is problem.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @ValisJason
but you're not proposing negotiations. You're insisting that we agree with your ideology that "massive supply is a win win."
4 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @natogreen @ValisJason
Seems "massive supply" is quite imbalanced so far in both RHNA cycles. A "win win"?pic.twitter.com/SRIEyDhaqE
7 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
getting less affordable at a rate of around 10-15% a year, maybe even including your own assets?
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Nice example of misguided animosity. Unable to debate without baiting and attacking. Pointless convo
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
so we're supposed to sit here while you keep recommending economically infeasible inclusionary % and your
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.