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.
-
-
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 @ValisJason and
I'd like to know how development in the richest areas of SF is going to drive displacement. Current policy is to build small amounts of market rate housing in poor areas, worsening everything.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @WatsonLadd @FitzTheReporter and
Problem with yimbys is that we talk like we're Spock. Throw a bunch of data everywhere. It doesnt matter if you point out the Eastside EIR, the fact that Chinatown is already 827 standards and all that. If people see displacement, and see a new building, that builds opinion
1 reply 0 retweets 14 likes -
Replying to @IDoTheThinking @WatsonLadd and
Yimbys are going to have to find emotional ways to reverse engineer the Californian notion that new neighbors, new buildings, and things being different arent the cause of displacement, nor are bad things, and thats exceedingly difficult. I used to think like that too.
2 replies 1 retweet 15 likes -
Replying to @IDoTheThinking @WatsonLadd and
I think one of the yimbys best lines of rhetoric that have worked better than I thought in high income suburbs is the notion that your children can't live here. As seen with Cupertino, it has a notable effect on the otherwise housing skeptical.
2 replies 2 retweets 13 likes -
Replying to @IDoTheThinking @WatsonLadd and
Whats the line for low income tenants that dont like development? I dunno. Redlining doesnt work well because a lot of them weren't there for that. So far using data to point out the Eastside EIR already targets low income areas is ineffective. Not personal enough.
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @IDoTheThinking @WatsonLadd and
I feel like at some point you have to make them aware of the fact that wealthier neighborhoods dont pull their fair share. Its kinda worked here with yimbys in Berkeley when contrasting untouched North Berkeley and frequently developed Ashby.
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @IDoTheThinking @WatsonLadd and
Lots of low income tenants and people of color at the North Berk meeting basically on board with the yimby initiated movement for housing. More difficult in SF for some reason....
2 replies 0 retweets 10 likes
SF's politics are really, really hardened around some longstanding relationships & organizational lines. The lines don't cross that way against development in like... literally every other city I've ever spent significant time in in the region.
-
-
And this is one messy year in SF politics even by their standards
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.