'Murica! (187 Viewers)
- Thread starter Fake Melo
- Start date
- Tags afl_italia's cousins forza trump smocking gun
What the guy is complaining imo is not a liberal thing, it’s a rich people thing. One particular senator put a bill on hold and doesn’t want the value of his property to go down. Don’t think conservatives would be any different.
What’s happening in San Fran is a matter of supply and demand. There is a lot of demand and not enough supply. Farook is saying to increase the supply so everyone has an equal opportunity. That’s more in line with socialism if anything imo.
And I’d personally be fine with that. There’s no reason someone needs to live in a mansion in a city with not enough houses. We don’t have Kings anymore.
What’s happening in San Fran is a matter of supply and demand. There is a lot of demand and not enough supply. Farook is saying to increase the supply so everyone has an equal opportunity. That’s more in line with socialism if anything imo.
And I’d personally be fine with that. There’s no reason someone needs to live in a mansion in a city with not enough houses. We don’t have Kings anymore.
It's a liberal thing because the policies in those cities are pushed and espoused by liberals and put into place by cities run by predominantly liberal politicians. What he is saying is that they are the main issue in many ways.
It's not a coincidence that all the cities with these issues are Democratic strongholds
It's not a coincidence that all the cities with these issues are Democratic strongholds
Zoning laws are important though, you can't just have big apartment buildings everywhere. I can't speak for San Francisco but my neighborhood cannot support such things whereas closer towards Manhattan it's fine, for example.
Which Republican cities do not have these issues? It is infinitely more complex than just red or blue.
Which Republican cities do not have these issues? It is infinitely more complex than just red or blue.
It doesn't really talk about how democrat-implemented policies contributed to this at all, it just talks about how the solutions are being stopped by the very wealthy. As ALC said, one senator who happened to be a democrat put the bill on hold. A republican would easily do the same exact thing, party isn't the defining factor in that, it's a money and entitlement thing. New York already has huge apartment complexes and condos near public transportation, and our homeless problem is not nearly as bad, though still bad:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallm...less-people-in-2018-infographic/#540242b81178
(keep in mind, New York has a population of over 8 million while LA has less than 4 million)
We have a different set of problems that contribute to this. I'd still like to know of a major city controlled by republicans without these issues though.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallm...less-people-in-2018-infographic/#540242b81178
(keep in mind, New York has a population of over 8 million while LA has less than 4 million)
We have a different set of problems that contribute to this. I'd still like to know of a major city controlled by republicans without these issues though.
Almost all of Texas big cities (Fort Worth being the only exception) have a democratic government. The piece you shared is so bad that made me dislike NYT a little bit more. The writer does not establish how one guy torpedoing a bill have anything to do with liberal "policies". Protecting a rich enclave is not a policy. It's one (or even multiple) guy(s) being bought and paid by their rich constituents. If HuffPo wanted to publish a similar article it would be titled: "Mississippi and Alabama are shitholes. Blame racist conservatives".
As others said zoning issue is beyond party. By the way your beloved president cares so much about the issue of housing that he appointed a neurosurgeon with no experience and a history of spewing nonsense as HUD secretary.
As others said zoning issue is beyond party. By the way your beloved president cares so much about the issue of housing that he appointed a neurosurgeon with no experience and a history of spewing nonsense as HUD secretary.
You have the post above for Dallas.
As for Newark, I don't know where your county is, but I'd wager that it's easily much greater in both population as well as population density. Both of those things lead to the issues we're talking about. Because sure, I could buy this house right now in cash, still have money left over, and probably live on minimum wage. It's three times the size of the house I'm living in now and it's about 7% of the price.
https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sa...86,-75.19352,41.983739,-75.562592_rect/11_zm/
Meanwhile here, I can't even look at a for sale sign with the money I have. This has nothing to do with where on the spectrum the local government falls though.
As for Newark, I don't know where your county is, but I'd wager that it's easily much greater in both population as well as population density. Both of those things lead to the issues we're talking about. Because sure, I could buy this house right now in cash, still have money left over, and probably live on minimum wage. It's three times the size of the house I'm living in now and it's about 7% of the price.
https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sa...86,-75.19352,41.983739,-75.562592_rect/11_zm/
Meanwhile here, I can't even look at a for sale sign with the money I have. This has nothing to do with where on the spectrum the local government falls though.