Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[iam416]

I understand why people think if you build more housing that it will hurt your property values, but I don't think that is the case in the long run.

The question isn't even one of supply and demand. Or I don't think so -- the shortfall is massive and the housing is surely saturated in the highest value markets. The question is what happens to your housing value if you put an apartment building next to it. And there are your NIMBYs. And in California, you have a massive regulatory arsenal at your disposal to either prevent new builds or make new builds so expensive that they're an economic risk.

Whatever. It'll sort itself out and it's not my problem. I just find it interesting.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Repeating myself probably but I really think this has to be the death knell for the Iowa caucus. It's possible they tell Iowa to switch to a primary or get booted behind other states.

* Fucked up the count. No clue when it'll finished
* Ignored warning from the national DNC that the app might not be trustworthy
* Didn't train anyone on how to use the app
* Quite possible the popular vote winner (Bernie) will come in second with state delegates (although it seems they could be tied in national delegates). This was always a possibility in a caucus but adding this on top of the all the clusterfuck makes it look worse
* Plenty of people prior to this were already saying Iowa, a state that's a borderline red state and non-representative of the Dem party, shouldn't go first

[Dr. Strangelove]

The question isn't even one of supply and demand. Or I don't think so -- the shortfall is massive and the housing is surely saturated in the highest value markets. The question is what happens to your housing value if you put an apartment building next to it. And there are your NIMBYs. And in California, you have a massive regulatory arsenal at your disposal to either prevent new builds or make new builds so expensive that they're an economic risk.

Whatever. It'll sort itself out and it's not my problem. I just find it interesting.

Well I realize the Dems could do anything if they wanted to out there. Maybe bipartisan is the wrong word. Well-off? Wealthy? Homeowners?

Whatever their political inclination, most California homeowners have an incentive to keep their property values up because that's their primary source of wealth. So none of them are going to be thrilled that you plan to build cheap apartments next door (or God forbid, a homeless shelter). San Francisco has a massive housing shortage and I recall an interview with some wealthy, elderly prog horrified at what an apartment building would mean to her neighborhood of beautiful victorian-era row houses.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Interesting. Population densities major cities. I knew San Fran is geographically small but still expected the density to be lower than that. Columbus is roughly the same as Dallas/Houston, fwiw

NYC (Manhattan only): 66,940
NYC (All): 26,403
San Francisco: 18,438
Boston: 13,841
Miami: 12,140
Chicago: 11,960
DC: 9,800
Seattle: 8,444
LA: 7,545
Denver: 4,044
Houston: 3,662
Dallas: 3,645
Atlanta: 3,547

EDIT: Corrected Atlanta

[iam416]

Whatever their political inclination, most California homeowners have an incentive to keep their property values up because that's their primary source of wealth. So none of them are going to be thrilled that you plan to build cheap apartments next door (or God forbid, a homeless shelter). San Francisco has a massive housing shortage and I recall an interview with some wealthy, elderly prog horrified at what an apartment building would mean to her neighborhood of beautiful victorian-era row houses.

Right. Well, look -- in my eyes these people are the true embodiment of Gentry Progressives. The wealthy elite folks who vote extremely progressive and extremely liberal except when it comes to them. In fact, they would surely embrace Obama's HUD policy of forcing more multi-family structures in, say, Suburban Connecticut (or anywhere else except their neighborhood). Eh, no one is free of hypocrisy -- I understand.

Although, to their credit, they are apparently willing to endure pooping on sidewalks. But, apartment buildings are a bridge too far.

[froot loops]

I'm not sure that housing situation will sort itself out in California. Toronto has a similar problem, Detroit doesn't have that problem so the whole thing is somewhat foreign to me. There isn't probably one solution but drastically scaling the single home zoning is one tool. It's a problem that is going to have a hard time getting sorted out at the state level. The inertia at the local level is to not build more,

[Dr. Strangelove]

Heh, Detroit has the opposite problem.

[iam416]

It's more like the entire god-forsaken state, but, yes, that includes Detroit.

[froot loops]

Plenty of land to build! Detroit's problem is weird one because there is a huge demand to live in downtown Detroit but its not enough where banks will warrant lending money. Not much in the way of NIMBYs in Detroit proper.

Although we still see some of the problems around here but it has to do with the suburban communities. It only takes a few bittersons at a city council meeting to foul up any development plans. Around here the only city that actively tries to get bigger is Royal Oak and that mayor gets a ton of flack.

[Whitley]

It's more like the entire god-forsaken state, but, yes, that includes Detroit.

Spoken like someone that has not been to the Traverse City area. For working class people there is a huge huge problem finding affordable housing. Why? Because TC is way too expensive and the surrounding counties most of them are vacation rentals. Getting any sort of 12 month lease is a real chore, because a lot of places only want to to do 8-9 month and then kick you out and rent at big prices to the vacation people.

Frankfort, for example, 70% of the houses are dark during the winter months. Now, don't get me wrong going resort did help save the city (they did it back in late 80s-early90s). However, it is a real issue about housing. The city council keeps kicking the issue of short term rentals down the road. Not wanting to deal with it. Not unlike most national politicians.

[iam416]

Columbus is actively getting bigger everywhere. Of course, it's mostly at the expense of Ohio's other cities -- to wit, "Dr." Strangelove relocated from his beloved Cleveland-area shithole to beautiful Fairfield County.

I don't know if it's the case with Detroit, but the biggest problem with Cleveland is that city between downtown and the inner ring suburbs. It's easy enough to attract people to downtown, and Cleveland does that. And they even do a decent job of having livable neighborhoods up to maybe 15-20 blocks in either direction (more W than E, but whatever). Then you hit a barren wasteland of despair. And it's about 90 blocks of shit until you get to an inner ring suburb (I'm generalizing -- it varies by side of the town). It's just HOLLOWED OUT. There's almost nothing to be done.

Columbus has it's bad spots, but even in its bad spots there are people living there. Because Columbus hasn't gone through a massive decline. Those rust belt cities are like a once fat person who loses 200 pounds -- the old folds of skin where there is no more fat -- that's what's everywhere in Cleveland. Depressing as hell.

[iam416]

Spoken like someone that has not been to the Traverse City area.

I should hope so.

I don't doubt the housing crunch in TC, but it's a small city and relatively small surrounding area. I don't doubt that people stuck in that shithole state want to find the lest objectionable place there to live and it creates internal demand.

I'm sure that's a big issue in TC, but it's like 150,000 people total in the "area" -- so, meh.

[froot loops]

That's exactly the case with Detroit. Its better than it was 20 years ago, even the downtown area was mostly ghost town. That has changed for the better, but the neighborhoods are still lagging. It doesn't help how massive the city is land wise, people like to point out you could fit the land mass of San Francisco, Boston and I want to say NYC into Detroit's land mass.

[Whitley]

I should hope so.

I don't doubt the housing crunch in TC, but it's a small city and relatively small surrounding area. I don't doubt that people stuck in that shithole state want to find the lest objectionable place there to live and it creates internal demand.

I'm sure that's a big issue in TC, but it's like 150,000 people total in the "area" -- so, meh.

So if it is a small populated area, the issues of people don't matter. Got it. A true corporate answer.

[froot loops]

Traverse City is a NIMBY haven. It is truly puzzling why it has the growth it does. Driving on some of those highways in the winter at night is a white knuckle adventure.