In light of the YIMBYs this week tipping their hand in attempting to no-platform tenants of color at risk of displacement due to SB827, I recommend the @antievictionmap's excellent report, "The Racial Contours of YIMBY/NIMBY Bay Area Gentrification" https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4sw2g485 …
Those numbers don’t say what the paper implies (also, they come from Tim Redmond, who is a white millionaire homeowner). They only count absentee homeowners, who usually rent their units out. Not vacant units.
-
-
To be concrete, if, say, the city of SF were to buy out one of those condo buildings and rent it out as 100% affordable public housing, then this map would consider it 100% “absentee homeowner” owned. But that wouldn’t be bad—in fact, it’d be an ideal outcome that we all want!
-
Why would city-owned housing in the city be considered absentee? The Forbes number comes from Marcus & Millichamp, a national development firm, which is uhh maybe not a more objective sourcepic.twitter.com/WFZd8YlhsU
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
The real statistic to look at is the vacancy rate, which for Bay Area is abnormally low, suggesting that the problem really is too little supply for the demand.https://www.forbes.com/sites/erincarlyle/2015/04/16/san-francisco-tops-forbes-2015-list-of-worst-cities-for-renters/#64415d7b62fa …
Thanks. 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.
