I'm looking at threads like this https://twitter.com/David_desJ/status/1123686232326905861?s=19 … These people have come to opposite advice on how to proceed
-
-
There are two opposing factions: don't build anything, or let developers build unlimited market-rate housing without zoning restrictions. Both are wrong. The solution has to be somewhere in the middle: build more housing, but use zoning restrictions to ensure it is affordable.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @David_desJ @SFyimby and
How do you ensure affordability with zoning restrictions? I'm open to the idea that there are people hurt by development that the YIMBYs are missing. But I've not seen it spelled out
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @snoble @David_desJ and
These are not the correct sides and there are many more sides. YIMBYs basically advocate for 4 things: 1) allowing multifamily housing in more places 2) speeding up permitting 3) more $$$ for subsidized Affordable Housing 4) reforming bad incentives (prop13, parking)
1 reply 0 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @yimbyaction @snoble and
Market rate and Affordable Housing is good. Both need multifamily zoning and a streamlined process that doesn't enable NIMBYs.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @yimbyaction @snoble and
Market rate multifamily housing is bad for affordability, not good. It attracts more high-income residents, who employ low-income service workers, but there's no corresponding increase in affordable housing, so affordability gets worse.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @David_desJ @snoble and
We disagree. YIMBYs believe that we are experiencing a general housing shortage and that both market rate and affordable housing are good. This is a common place where YIMBYs break with Affordable-Only folks. No hard feelings!
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @yimbyaction @snoble and
That may be what *you* believe, but it's not what "YIMBY" means. That literally just refers to supporting development of some kind. You can't redefine it to mean that all development is good.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @David_desJ @yimbyaction and
It seems if you can agree with the policies that
@yimbyaction advocates, but disagree that those policies are appropriate for the name YIMBY, then that's a big step towards being allies1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @snoble @yimbyaction and
I think if you let developers build whatever dense market-rate housing they find most profitable, that makes housing affordability worse. They think it makes affordability better (or at least they claim to think that). It's a pretty fundamental difference.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@snoble, this is a very common version of the online discourse between YIMBYs and folks who want Affordable-Only policies. I'm gonna tap out, but have a nice night everyone!
-
-
Replying to @yimbyaction @David_desJ and
But on the slack group that is what is professed -- market rate housing. It cuts out all low income people and people of color. That's the one thing that should be changed -- developers should not profit from housing at all.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @catnamedspot @yimbyaction and
I am not going to sign on to abolishing capitalism, because without the profit motive you require centralized planning, and the history of that is worse. But we need to make the incentives significantly different, e.g., zoning waivers only for inherently affordable housing.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
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.

Become a member at