News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Demolishing the California Dream: How SF Planned Its Own ... by dsfyu404ed on Wednesday September 26, 2018 @01:26PM (#18078237)
Their strategies all have a common component: lots of government involvement in what people build and do on their property (the presence of regulation is but one aspect of involvement, how that regulation is implemented matters a lot, see TFA for examples).

Not wanting lots of government management of something is only anti-liberal because modern "liberals" in the US have hitched their horse to the big government wagon.

Re:Demolishing the California Dream: How SF Planned Its Own ... by gamblor956 on Wednesday September 26, 2018 @01:38PM (#18078350)
CA and NY don't have more significantly regulations about what people can build and do on their property than Texas and Oklahoma. We simply have more reasonable zoning restrictions, like not allowing housing in areas designed as floodplains, or schools and housing within a few hundred feet of an oil refinery or fertilizer plant or other industrial facility susceptible to explosive accidents.

Parts of California, like the SF Bay Area, have more restrictive zoning laws. This is not true of the state as a whole, and generally the restrictiveness of zoning laws is highly correlated with the per capita household income of an area, not with its political leanings. (In LA, for example, the most restrictive zoning laws are found in Palos Verdes, the most conservative part of the city but also one of its wealthiest. Commercial buildings are generally limited to 2 stories in the few areas where they even allow commercial development. Contrast that to Beverly Hills, an equally wealthy neighborhood that leans significantly leftward that allows for significant commercial and mixed-use developments. )

Re:Demolishing the California Dream: How SF Planned Its Own ... by hfdgiutdryg on Wednesday September 26, 2018 @01:43PM (#18078403)
lots of government regulation of what people build and do on their property.

That's an inevitable result of population density.

Re:Demolishing the California Dream: How SF Planned Its Own ... by dsfyu404ed on Wednesday September 26, 2018 @01:54PM (#18078526)
Regulation and involvement are two different things. Many cities are basically shall-issue when it comes to permitting. Others hand out variances like colleges hand out condoms.
Re:Demolishing the California Dream: How SF Planned Its Own ... by hfdgiutdryg on Wednesday September 26, 2018 @02:19PM (#18078769)
I don't see how your response has any relation to what I wrote. It looks more like moving goalposts to me.
Re:Demolishing the California Dream: How SF Planned Its Own ... by dsfyu404ed on Wednesday September 26, 2018 @02:28PM (#18078859)
I'm saying that regulating zoning in an of itself is something all cities do but they do it to wildly varying extents (e.g. SF vs. Houston) and it doesn't correlated as directly with population as you're saying it does. It's also possible to regulate something (i.e. have zoning rules) but still take a very hands-off approach.