[sudo-discuss] (Matt, don't read this!) Dystopia News: No-Sex Apartments.

[GtwoG PublicOhOne]

Sonja, if you think I'm "just finding out now that we're none of us
free," have I got news for you.

Though I was surprised to hear that there are HOAs in San Francisco and
that they have political clout.  I thought HOAs were limited to suburbs,
plus or minus the ones that used to exist in cities for purposes of
enforcing housing segregation.

Housing is the one "commodity" where people celebrate inflation.  The
root problems are three: overpopulation and overconsumption, as with
almost everything else in the Decline & Fall, and real estate
speculation.  The common denominators are personal gains and
externalized costs.  And the cure for real estate speculation is _land
reform_.  Easier said than done in an area where one company
(Shorenstein) owns 80% plus of downtown properties (close to 100% in San
Francisco, "just say Monopoly, now you get to have a hotel!").    

What's also needed is a comprehensive and conclusive critique of
end-stage capitalism, with proposals for coherent alternatives, updated
to the 21st century: something that can stir up mass action on every
axis of change.  The ideologies of the past may have bits and pieces of
timeless wisdom, but they never anticipated the science fiction dystopia
of current times. 

-G.


=====


On 13-05-20-Mon 3:28 PM, Sonja Trauss wrote:
> The obvious evil - doer is the laws that make it hard to build new
> housing in sf. 
>
> There are strong home owners associations suppressing supply over
> there and keeping rent high. 
>
> Does anyone know of an org that tries to counter that, or are
> developers the only entities that lobby on the other side?
>
> Gtwog you amaze me with every post - you're just finding out now that
> we're none of us free, huh. 
>
> On Monday, May 20, 2013, GtwoG PublicOhOne wrote:
>
>
>
>     No-Sex Apartments.
>
>     (Creative commons, with attribution to "G.")
>
>     In cities across the USA, a new "solution" to affordable housing is
>     being promoted: micro-apartments of less than 200 square feet.  New
>     York's conrol-freak in chief, Mayor Bloomberg, is promoting them (New
>     Yorkers call them "Bloom Boxes").  A developer in San Francisco is
>     promoting them.  And developers in Seattle WA are building them by the
>     hundreds.
>
>     The Seattle apartments were recently covered in a CBS News
>     article, here:
>     http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57582327/tiny-apartments-are-creating-a-big-backlash-in-seattle/
>
>     If you look at the picture, something immediately stands out: a
>     TWIN BED.
>
>     As the article says, "...(the) apartment comes with a small private
>     bathroom, a microwave and a mini-refrigerator. There's just enough
>     room
>     for a twin bed, a neatly hung rack of clothes and shelves."  (There's
>     not even room for a desk, so forget about working from home: it's back
>     to the plantation for you, worker-bee.)
>
>     And therein lies the catch, or more accurately the "nudge," to use the
>     Newspeak word for "manipulation."
>
>     A twin bed is sufficient for sleeping, but not sufficient for a
>     regular
>     sex life with others, much less a stable relationship.
>
>     Sure, you can manage it occasionally, but for the long term it's right
>     out.  Squeezing two people into a bed meant for one is miserable,
>     particularly in the hot summer.
>
>     This is one form of "birth control" that won't be controversial
>     with the
>     Vatican or other right-wing religious denominations.  I suppose that
>     also qualifies as a "feature."  (We won't mention the fact that
>     you can
>     carry on a satisfactory solo sex life in a twin bed, lest the twin
>     beds
>     be replaced with "stand-up beds" consisting of straps on the wall.)
>
>     There's no need for the Oligarchy to make an explicit No Sex rule.
>      They
>     don't have to, when they can just "nudge" the architecture to enforce
>     that outcome by "nudging" people who might think to disobey.
>
>     Best of all (from the Oligarchy's perspective), there's nothing to
>     revolt against.  A revolt against a type of architecture is like a
>     revolt against traffic jams or weather: there's no obvious
>     evil-doer to
>     hurl ballots and tomatoes at.
>
>     The Oligarchy likes micro-apartments because they are more profitable
>     per square foot of building, compared to apartments that let you
>     have a
>     bed big enough for two people, and a fridge big enough to let you keep
>     enough food that you don't have to go shopping every day.
>
>     The working masses (that would be us) who are being lined up to
>     live in
>     these boxes would do well to recognize that they are also about
>     the same
>     size as prison cells.
>
>     The only difference is that you have the key to your cell, just like
>     inmates in "honor system prisons" for white collar criminals.
>      That, and
>     there isn't a guard staring at you whilst you poop, though I'd be
>     careful about the tiny apartments that come with internet and TV
>     service
>     included (no choice of carriers either), as the "smart sensors"
>     won't be
>     far behind.
>
>     Smaller houses and apartments are of course part of a viable
>     approach to
>     sustainability: primarily through lower energy consumption and
>     proximity
>     to public transport.  Some years ago, a close friend and I came up
>     with
>     various designs for micro-houses, from about 160 square feet, up to
>     about 400 - 500 square feet.  A building with a 500 square foot
>     "building footprint" was sufficient for a family of four.  We were
>     designing for the sake of sustainability, and for the ability of
>     individuals and communities to build these houses for themselves
>     at low
>     cost.
>
>     But as with eating bugs, it's one thing to do it by the choice of your
>     own free will, quite another to do it by way of getting mercilessly
>     milked by the Oligarchy.  Especially when the Oligarchs continue
>     to live
>     in 12,000 square foot (and larger) mansions with sprawling lawns
>     on all
>     sides.
>
>     What the world can't afford, is the Oligarchy.  Darwin, take note!
>
>     -G.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     sudo-discuss mailing list
>     sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org <javascript:;>
>     http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20130520/d659bd53/attachment.html>