I think the point a lot of people are making is that, historically, building new stuff, including housing, has led to the displacement of low-income tenants, particularly in communities of color. And there are some contemporary examples of this, too. So the distrust remains.
-
-
Replying to @DarwinBondGraha @End_Evictions and
The issue is that new construction only generally pencils when prevailing rents are already high enough to induce displacement in the existing housing stock. New housing didn’t pencil in Oakland until 2014, after a crisis was well underway.
2 replies 1 retweet 12 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @DarwinBondGraha and
But the perceived reaction of pro-development community is "well, displacement just happens. For the greater good of the region in a decade or two, we need to displace you now. Can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs, right?"
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @FitzTheReporter @kimmaicutler and
The relationship between development and displacement gets a little confused when you note that the only recent year when rents and evictions both dropped was 2016, when a record number of market rate and BMR units came online.
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @derivativeburke @FitzTheReporter and
(And I guess in every year when we didn’t build that much housing, rents and evictions rose)
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @derivativeburke @kimmaicutler and
See that's the type of response that drives that wedge, right there. If they say "we need protections for people now" and you talk about year-to-year trends, it's not helping people in the immediate *now*, and the answer seems callous, and devoid of empathy. That dynamic repeats.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @FitzTheReporter @derivativeburke and
I am really curious why you think pointing out that rents and evictions decreased made his response divisive?
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @ValisJason @derivativeburke and
Because its not acknowledging the concern that development drives displacement, nor does it directly address that displacement nor protections for it. Its like that Katrina example. "People need blankets and boars!" "Lower carbon emissions and global warming will be lessned!"
5 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @FitzTheReporter @derivativeburke and
This confuses me. Acknowledging that evictions and affordability is a problem and that certain policies seem to reduce evictions and rent prices is responding to people's concerns about displacement and affordability. Right?
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @ValisJason @derivativeburke and
Yes but not. It is a long term aid, not an immediate aid. Like telling someone with a broken arm to give up smoking for their health.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
I guess we’re all gonna die of lung cancer together then.
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.