[sudo-discuss] new occuption in SF: #gezigardens

Mon Jun 10 15:32:32 PDT 2013

hah yeah - that's true - it's possible, likely even, that the population of
SF is going to expand even faster than the supply of housing. If thats the
case then we should not only be building, but building more! Not building
would be the worst.

There are a lot of ppl that want to live here, the thing is, it's politics,
not technology or geography that limits the supply of housing. This isnt
1800, we know how to build tall buildings. We even know how to build tall
buildings that withstand earthquakes. Like many types of scarcity, scarcity
of housing is 100% solvable, 100% manufactured. I'm not exactly sure who
benefits from scarcity of housing. Obviously current owners of SF property,
and current Oakland stakeholders. I don't see how the genzigarden types
benefit from land scarcity. They strike me as people that own nothing, but
maybe they are Oakland stakeholders?

On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 3:24 PM, GtwoG PublicOhOne <g2g-public01 at att.net>wrote:

>
> Rich Guy decides to move into new apartment across the street for
> $3,000/month.  Owner of his old apartment puts it back on the market for
> $3,000/month.  Four guys who have just scored H1B visas move in the next
> day.
>
> Four hackers lose their jobs to the guys with the H1B visas.  Three of
> them are living in tiny "studios" for $2,000/month, but one of them has a
> 1-bedroom apartment at the same price, so all four of them "consolidate"
> into the 1-BR together to save money.
>
> That's how "the market" _really_ works.  When there are more humans than
> there are resources to employ and house the humans, the value of humans
> declines relative to the resources needed to support them.
>
> Meanwhile, since our unemployed hackers also have carpentry skills, they
> move into the one-bedroom apartment together and build two sets of double
> bunks in the bedroom for sleeping.  They soundproof the closet to provide
> "private space" for carrying on their sex lives, and use a scheduling app
> to coordinate use of the closet, and use of the shower as well.
>
> They spend two hours a week having "house meetings" with topics such as
> "who left a mess in the sex-closet this weekend?" and "which blend of
> coffee to buy for the network-connected coffee maker?"  The one who's gay
> publishes sarcastic "back in the closet" jokes to a mailing list, and the
> jokes go viral.  One of them 3D-prints a multiple-hopper input device for
> the coffee maker and a cup-sequencer for its output, enabling it to handle
> four different blends of coffee at once, and is hailed as a genius by the
> other three.
>
> -G.
>
>
> =====
>
>
>
> On 13-06-10-Mon 1:46 PM, Jehan Tremback wrote:
>
> @Eddie- Sorry about the eye! That was the default Ubuntu avatar, and it
> somehow got synced to my email when I ran Pidgin. So the eye is actually
> open source! I'll get rid of it though if you want.
>
>  I'll go over this briefly, but there are better resources out there.
>
>  Let's say rich guy can afford $3000 dollars a month and wants to live in
> SF. So landlord charges him $3000 for an apartment because it isn't a
> closet. Since there is nowhere else to live in SF, rich guy pays this. New
> luxury building opens across the street with really nice new apartments for
> $3000 a month. Rich guy decides to move, and landlord puts apartment back
> on the market for $3000. But because all of the other rich guys are also
> living in the new luxury building, landlord finds no tenants. Next month,
> landlord is forced to lower rent to $2000 and 4 hackers move in. This is
> how the market works.
>
>  -Jehan
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Sonja Trauss <sonja.trauss at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Ok so your position is that the whole of the new housing will be taken up
>> by people who don't currently live in SF, want to, but won't move into SF
>> unless new housing is built.
>>
>>  Can you describe what it is about the new housing that will make people
>> who already have stable, adequate places to live elsewhere move into it,
>> when they've already decided theyre not interested in living in any of the
>> currently available sf housing? Does this question make sense? What's
>> special about the new housing? What would make a person move to SF Only If
>> new housing is built? What is the scenario. I can think of two. One silly
>> and one not silly.
>>
>>
>> On Sunday, June 9, 2013, Eddie Che wrote:
>>
>>>  Oy, greetings. First of all that Eye is really hateful, let's tone
>>> that down a little! I've been against the eye because it is oppressive
>>> so, chill. @Jehan.
>>>
>>> Building will increase the population in San Francisco. Not house the
>>> houseless and not bring down rents. These are upscale (condos?)
>>> apartments, bringing the added keyword of gentrification.
>>>
>>> I like the Spain example. Government here (County, City, State, and
>>> National) could give land that is being held by it, eg around highway
>>> off-ramps or hills or wherEVER to folks who are disenchanted with...
>>> corporate rule.
>>>
>>> "liberating land from private control and corporate interests and for
>>> the common good of all people."
>>>
>>> Can we hack that?
>>> EMCHE, in a tree.
>>>
>>> PS by the way, surprising about SF's vacant housing units @
>>>
>>> https://www.baycitizen.org/blogs/pulse-of-the-bay/sf-leads-bay-area-vacant-homes/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 6:41 PM, GtwoG PublicOhOne <g2g-public01 at att.net>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Imagine a news headline saying "Good news for the economy: food prices
>>> are
>>> > up for the third month in a row!"  Food-owners would celebrate, and
>>> > foodless-rights advocates would protest, but nothing would change
>>> unless the
>>> > entire system of food-speculation was curbed.
>>> >
>>> > Or imagine this:  Dateline: Marinaleda, Spain.  Municipal government
>>> GIVES
>>> > dispossessed people the land and building materials to build their own
>>> > homes, and pays contractors to provide assistance with the high-skill
>>> parts
>>> > such as plumbing.  This is REAL and it's happening NOW.
>>> >
>>> > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22701384
>>> >
>>> > "In the wake of Spain's property crash, hundreds of thousands of homes
>>> have
>>> > been repossessed. While one regional government says it will seize
>>> > repossessed properties from the banks, a little town is doing away with
>>> > mortgages altogether. ...  In Marinaleda, residents like 42-year-old
>>> > father-of-three, David Gonzalez Molina, are building their own homes.
>>> >
>>> > "The town hall in this ... town an hour-and-a-bit east of Seville, has
>>> given
>>> > David 190 sq m (2,000 sq ft) of land. ...  The bricks and mortar are
>>> also a
>>> > gift... from the regional government of Andalusia. ... Only once his
>>> home is
>>> > finished will he start paying 15 euros (£13) [approx. $26] a month, to
>>> the
>>> > regional government, to refund the cost of other building materials.
>>> ...
>>> >
>>> > "...[The town's] Mayor Juan Manuel Sanchez Gordillo is known for
>>> occupying
>>> > land belonging to the wealthy in Andalusia. ... Last summer, he and his
>>> > left-wing union comrades stole from supermarkets and handed out the
>>> food to
>>> > the poor.  "I think it is possible that a home should be a right, and
>>> not a
>>> > business, in Europe", he argues. Mayor Sanchez Gordillo pours scorn on
>>> > "speculators"....
>>> >
>>> > ---
>>> >
>>> > Think outside the box, and you might end up thinking like Mayor Sanchez
>>> > Gordillo.
>>> >
>>> > What happens when home prices and rents keep increasing while average
>>> income
>>> > levels have barely budged since 1974?
>>> >
>>> > What happens to the lives of people, when the health of an economy in
>>> large
>>> > part depends on relentless increase in the price of a vital necessity
>>> that
>>> > is also a fixed resource, such as the square footage in which to eat,
>>> sleep,
>>> > and wash?
>>> >
>>> > Meanwhile developers are building "luxury" apartments, but the number
>>> of
>>> > "affordable" units isn't specified and always turns out to be less than
>>> > first claimed.  How is it that anyone has a "right" to luxury, at the
>>> > expense of others' poverty and homelessness?
>>> >
>>> > At root, this isn't a race issue of black and white, though the
>>> guardians of
>>> > privilege benefit mightily when it's framed that way, and people who
>>> have
>>> > common cause are divided against each other.  At root, it's a class
>>> issue of
>>> > green and red.
>>> >
>>> > Land speculation is a broken machine running an obsolete operating
>>> system,
>>> > that's begging to get "rooted."
>>> >
>>> > -G
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > =====
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 13-06-08-Sat 3:06 PM, Sonja Trauss wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I know, it's so outrageous. This line, "The notion of smart growth —
>>> also
>>> > referred to as urban infill — has been around for years, embraced by a
>>> > certain type of environmentalist, particularly those concerned with
>>> > protecting open space."
>>> >
>>> > Yeah, the type of environmentalist that is an environmentalist - what
>>> is
>>> > this supposed to mean!
>>> >
>>> > Also I guess (I hope) these progressives don't realize that in opposing
>>> > development in Bayview, they are contributing to keeping blacks overall
>>> > poorer than whites.
>>> >
>>> > Putting renters aside for a minute, let's consider similarly situated
>>> black
>>> > and white homeowners, in similar income black and white neighborhoods.
>>> If
>>> > these neighborhoods are in a city that is growing in wealth and
>>> population
>>> > (like san francisco) both homeowners should be able to look forward to
>>> their
>>> > house values increasing, right? NO. House values at first only
>>> increase in
>>> > the white neighborhoods, because the new residents, moving to SF from
>>> all
>>>   > --
>>> Eddie Miller, BU '10
>>> eddiemill at gmail.com | 440-935-5434
>>> Facebook.com/eddiemill | Twitter.com/eddiemill
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing listsudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.orghttp://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20130610/c7c8fcfe/attachment.html>