https://www.sfgate.com/expensive-san-francisco/article/peter...
This is an opinion and not fact - it's how it looks from your perspective. The line between what is a smart investment and unfair feudalism is pretty gray, and I am betting people decide how to frame the situation based on how it personally affects them. That is, I am betting everyone is acting in a self-serving manner.
> Not what's good for the SF boomer wanting to sell his shack for 2M and retire in Florida.
This statement comes off as ageist. Why is it wrong for the SF boomer to want to make a gain off their investment and retire elsewhere? This is a core mechanism of every modern society.
> A couple of billionaires in Atherton should have no say on Caltrain improvements that could benefit millions of working people at the expense of a couple of trees in their backyards.
You are cherry-picking. It isn't just a "couple of billionaires in Atherton". But even if it were, why can't they choose to defend their quality of life? Why does everyone have to live in the bay area? This all comes off as people feeling entitled to live in a highly-desirable region, but on terms that suit them.