Re:95% of Bay Area Cities Lost Zoning Authority
by djur on Thursday February 23, 2023 @02:22PM
(#34915110)
I think there's a big difference between "I want to be paid to live in an economically collapsed community because I was born here" and "I want to be able to afford to live in an economically thriving community because my friends and family are here". Especially when considering government policy.
Re:95% of Bay Area Cities Lost Zoning Authority
by shadowgovt on Thursday February 23, 2023 @05:35PM
(#34917659)
What is the big difference?
Re:95% of Bay Area Cities Lost Zoning Authority
by djur on Friday February 24, 2023 @04:11AM
(#34922589)
1) Generally speaking, family and friend communities offer support structures that increase individual success and decrease antisocial behavior. Keeping those communities together is worthwhile both from a social welfare perspective and an economic efficiency one.
2) Reducing obstacles to building is free (in the long term, it's revenue-positive). Propping up a dying town is expensive.
I grew up in a town with an economic implosion. Very few people born here during the '70s stayed, and there was not, is not, and should not be a mechanism to bend the economics of the entire country to enable them to do so (if for no other reason than their industry collapsed for a compelling counter-concern: it was killing us. Pollution controls went in and the best companies in town could no longer compete while maintaining air quality standards and shuttered operations. So now people were out of work but the work was also not shortening their lives by a decade).