Nah, real estate developers and state/city governments are the problem (they could have just instituted rent control 10-20 years ago, ya know). Gentrification is simply a natural condition of capitalism. You can't blame the player, blame the game.
US Politics
- Thread starter Nick 0208 Ldn
- Start date
Nah, real estate developers and state/city governments are the problem (they could have just instituted rent control 10-20 years ago, ya know). Gentrification is simply a natural condition of capitalism. You can't blame the player, blame the game.
They are the problem too, as a result of the giant amounts of VC money being pumped into the city as a result of.........wait for it.......tech companies.
No. Just look at the facts. This doesn't only happen because "tech companies". You see the same gentrification in places like Inglewood due to sports/retail development , DTLA due to long term sports/entertainment/finance development and other places due to city council priorities to develop luxury development because of other industries like entertainment and finance.
If the "problem is tech companies" you wouldnt see the gentrification problems in areas without tech companies.
The problem is both systemic and due to a wider range of developer issues than just tech. Its just not accurate for you to try to reduce it to big tech.
Had city and state officials been devoted to long term sustainable practices instead of being beholden to donors they could have circumvented this years ago irrespective of any tech investment.
Its not tech companies job to manage gentrification, that's the job of elected officiala
LA and SF are completely different issues that can't be compared. For the sake of the original question, SF has seen soaring real estate costs since the dot com boom of the 90s (in which I worked). Property values before the dot com years were relatively affordable, and after it not affordable at all. It was the introduction of tech startups and the billions in VC funding that started the problem, albeit with a series of policy failures at the local/county and state levels that didn't adequately deal with how to mitigate it. Boston is going through a similar issue right now with biotech, pharma, and tech companies that have piled into the city in recent years.
They very much can be compared because the underlying issue is gentrification which isn't unique to tech investment (since you see the exact same problems with other outsized capital investment from entertainment, sports, finance, etc) and the failure of state and city governments to manage a well-known issue over the past 2 decades. The other problem is luxury real estate developers. Tech companies don't lobby the governments against things like rent control, affordable housing initiatives and other forms of development control, real estate entities do.
The problem starts with systemic issues which is the result of 20+ years of elected officials who have cared more about personal profit/political power than addressing any of these well-known issues of development economics.
The capital investment (be it tech, entertainment, sports, etc) only plays by the underlying rules in place. 20 years ago, elected officials should have seen this coming and addressed it but they did not. Real estate developers have also been far more active in shaping housing rules than tech companies so they are more to blame.
@Raoul
Here are some articles that illustrate the political problem. It lies in big real estate not big tech
In California and across the country, landlord groups are waging a disinformation campaign to squash efforts to make rent more affordable.
"The financialization of the rental housing market has had profound ramifications,” explains Schur. “This is rip and run—the Blackstones of the world are not investing long-term in our communities, they are extracting wealth from California to give to investors in the global financial market.” The impact of legislation like Proposition 10 on a local landlord is nominal compared to the impact on a group like Blackstone, which has a portfolio of around 13,000 single-family rentals in California and a 40 percent stake in Invitation Homes, a property management group with another 13,000 homes in the state."
https://newrepublic.com/article/151783/deceptive-shameful-lucratively-funded-war-rent-control
"The website for Californians for Responsible Housing states that Proposition 21 is “opposed by a broad, diverse coalition of seniors, veterans, labor, homeowners, affordable housing advocates, and businesses.”
Its corporate backers, however, don’t line up with the image the group tries to portray. Real estate trusts Essex Property Trust, Equity Residential, and AvalonBay Communities have contributed more than $34 million to Californians for Responsible Housing, according to state records. The three groups’ real estate portfolios have a combined net worth of about $28 billion as of June 30, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission."
"The California legislature limited rent control in 1995, at a time when tenant protections were being gutted around the country. That year, state lawmakers passed the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, which prohibits the application of rent control to single-family homes and newly built housing completed on or after Feb. 1, 1995. It also blocks rent control laws from dictating what landlords can charge new renters."
https://theappeal.org/california-prop-21-rent-control-money-in-politi/
"A Housing Is A Human Right investigation found that powerful, real estate players shelled out a whopping $77.3 million to stop Proposition 10 in California. They spent heavily to halt the grassroots effort to urgently address the state’s devastating housing affordability and homeless crises. Multi-billion-dollar real estate investment trusts (REITs) such as Blackstone Group, Essex Property Trust, and Equity Residential led the corporate charge."
https://www.housinghumanright.org/california-big-real-estate-spent-77-million-stop-rent-control/
"But for the real estate industry, a win for rent control in Santa Rosa could create a domino effect across the North Bay Area and beyond, and so the California Apartment Association and local and national realtor groups sought to make an example of the town, amassing an $800,000 war chest to fight back. What followed is a graphic example of what happens when the industry declares total war on renters and local government over rent control. Santa Rosa’s struggle over rent control also shows how difficult it is for cities to enact and defend such laws, in large part because they are often outmaneuvered and outgunned by the state and national real estate industry."
https://www.visaliatimesdelta.com/s...l-estate-crushed-rent-control-law/5913567002/
So, again for posterity, it's not tech companies spending millions to lobby the government to maintain a status quo that is horrible for the bottom 80%, it's the corporate wealth of real estate entities.
Here are some articles that illustrate the political problem. It lies in big real estate not big tech
In California and across the country, landlord groups are waging a disinformation campaign to squash efforts to make rent more affordable.
"The financialization of the rental housing market has had profound ramifications,” explains Schur. “This is rip and run—the Blackstones of the world are not investing long-term in our communities, they are extracting wealth from California to give to investors in the global financial market.” The impact of legislation like Proposition 10 on a local landlord is nominal compared to the impact on a group like Blackstone, which has a portfolio of around 13,000 single-family rentals in California and a 40 percent stake in Invitation Homes, a property management group with another 13,000 homes in the state."
https://newrepublic.com/article/151783/deceptive-shameful-lucratively-funded-war-rent-control
"The website for Californians for Responsible Housing states that Proposition 21 is “opposed by a broad, diverse coalition of seniors, veterans, labor, homeowners, affordable housing advocates, and businesses.”
Its corporate backers, however, don’t line up with the image the group tries to portray. Real estate trusts Essex Property Trust, Equity Residential, and AvalonBay Communities have contributed more than $34 million to Californians for Responsible Housing, according to state records. The three groups’ real estate portfolios have a combined net worth of about $28 billion as of June 30, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission."
"The California legislature limited rent control in 1995, at a time when tenant protections were being gutted around the country. That year, state lawmakers passed the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, which prohibits the application of rent control to single-family homes and newly built housing completed on or after Feb. 1, 1995. It also blocks rent control laws from dictating what landlords can charge new renters."
https://theappeal.org/california-prop-21-rent-control-money-in-politi/
"A Housing Is A Human Right investigation found that powerful, real estate players shelled out a whopping $77.3 million to stop Proposition 10 in California. They spent heavily to halt the grassroots effort to urgently address the state’s devastating housing affordability and homeless crises. Multi-billion-dollar real estate investment trusts (REITs) such as Blackstone Group, Essex Property Trust, and Equity Residential led the corporate charge."
https://www.housinghumanright.org/california-big-real-estate-spent-77-million-stop-rent-control/
"But for the real estate industry, a win for rent control in Santa Rosa could create a domino effect across the North Bay Area and beyond, and so the California Apartment Association and local and national realtor groups sought to make an example of the town, amassing an $800,000 war chest to fight back. What followed is a graphic example of what happens when the industry declares total war on renters and local government over rent control. Santa Rosa’s struggle over rent control also shows how difficult it is for cities to enact and defend such laws, in large part because they are often outmaneuvered and outgunned by the state and national real estate industry."
https://www.visaliatimesdelta.com/s...l-estate-crushed-rent-control-law/5913567002/
So, again for posterity, it's not tech companies spending millions to lobby the government to maintain a status quo that is horrible for the bottom 80%, it's the corporate wealth of real estate entities.
Thanks bro. I'll take a look at these links in a bit.
Also isn't it worth mentioning that tech companies overall makes the economy better for the area by earning a shit load of money? You don't solve the issue by taking that money away. However, managing the money better should in theory make for a better average standard of living, that requires wealth redistribution though, which, you know, is communism. Or is that too simplistic a way to look at it?
Last edited:
Can see her running for Senate when Feinstein retires. But that is probably her ceiling.
Tbf, would be nice if she gets Harris’ job.
I think this is true, but to be fair, if you are not working in tech, why would you live in Silicon Valley? It is as boring as it can get, and everything is overpriced. I don’t even know what Silicon Valley towns (Palo Alto, Mountain View, Cupertino, Menlo Park, Sunnyvale and Santa Clara) were before big tech companies arrived, but probably not much bigger than villages.
They definitely ruined San Francisco though. Was a great city, now is unaffordable to live if you do not work at tech, and it has 17k homeless people.
Good for economy in general (hundreds of thousands of jobs * focused there that pay on average 200k or so, with close to 40% of that going into taxes) but might be bad for local population. With those highly-paid jobs coming, the rent gets higher and it becomes unaffordable for people who are working in normal jobs. This is why it is extremely common for people who work in SF, to commute 4-5 hours per day.
To be fair, SF has pretty obscure regulations for new houses. Never understood why they do not allow building a shitload of new buildings which will bring the house pricing down, and make it affordable for the regular Joe who might be working as a nurse, bartender or policeman.
* The vast majority of them actually are not to local populations, in fact the majority of them goes to highly skilled immigrants. Nothing wrong with that, but it doesn’t help the local population.
Communism doesn’t result with a better average standard of living. It results with mass starvations.
That bit was a joke about how all sorts of wealth redistribution is seen as communism in the US (except if it's to bailout big business).
honestly what the feck are you even talking about
santa clara had 87k people in 1980. probably not much bigger than villages
menlo park had 26k people in 1980. probably not much bigger than villages
sunnyvale had 106k people in 1980. probably not much bigger than villages
cupertino had 34k people in 1980. probably not much bigger than villages
mountain view had 58k people in 1980. probably not much bigger than villages
palo alto had 55k peopple in 1980. probably not much bigger than villages.
you dont know anything! just stop typing!
menlo park had 26k people in 1980. probably not much bigger than villages
sunnyvale had 106k people in 1980. probably not much bigger than villages
cupertino had 34k people in 1980. probably not much bigger than villages
mountain view had 58k people in 1980. probably not much bigger than villages
palo alto had 55k peopple in 1980. probably not much bigger than villages.
you dont know anything! just stop typing!
Always nice to point and laugh at someone who thinks they have empirical data on Communism.
why would anyone live near stanford or the university of california?
Because it is a boring shithole. The only reason to live there is to be near your job. And yet, there are tens of thousands of people who decide to commute 3-4 hours from San Francisco in a nightmare traffic while choosing to pay more in rent in SF.
Have you ever been there or lived there?
Every time communism is as tested in practice, people starved. Just some lunatic had a lucid dream and now kids think it is cool, it is not and has never been a good idea.
yes, ive been to the quaint village of san jose. i was born in mountain view
Cool. I hope you enjoyed it. For me it was the most boring place I ever lived and pretty much everyone I knew who had lived in some proper city couldn’t wait to leave it.
San Jose is a bit more interesting, but almost all companies are in the towns I mentioned, not in San Jose.
Identical to capitalism then?
Yeah sure. The standard of living in Wstern Europe and US has always been as low as in Mao’s China, Soviet Union or Laos. Identical!
I believe she's in Sherman Oaks. Massive failure of the local LA city/county officials to allow the film crew to keep operating while she had to shut down.
There is literally hundreds of millions of people across the world living in capitalist countries who are currently starving and living in abject poverty. I’m not claiming the standards of living in those countries in general are not better than they were in those dictatorships over half a century ago but let’s not pretend that capitalism and “free market economics” is not as broken in its idealistic core as communism is. Peak capitalism is where one man edges towards becoming a trillionaire while his staff survive off food banks.
Yeah, radical capitalism is as bad, though fortunately we don’t have a totally market-based system anywhere (I would prefer having a more balanced than the current one though).
Not a valid comparison.
From nextdoor app
"Apparently no one really understands. It is comparing two completely different environments! The safety protocols the film industry uses are incredible. Everyone is tested daily, not to mention there are COVID officers on every set ensuring people maintain social distance. Gone are the holding areas of the past, everyone is masked up and six feet apart or kicked off the set. Actors do not remove there masks until cameras are rolling!"
And this woman's restaurant, Pineapple Saloon, or something has $90,000 on donations on GoFundme at the moment so "trumpettester" (the name of who posted the video) will be just fine.
Its easy to see how area businesses would view local and state politicians with contempt for allowing two standards among mom and pop and larger industry who have more resources to remain solvent. Another failure of the system.
So radical capitalism is at fault for what Pexbo said, but fortunately we don't have that anywhere? "honestly what the feck are you even talking about"
Complete lack of historical and philosophical knowledge on display here.
We do not have in any country radical capitalism (which would be an economy totally dictated by the market). Even in very capitalist countries like the US, the state intervenes and people/companies pay taxes.
Give me a single example of where communism has ever worked in practice.
I’d argue that there’s never been a genuine example of communism in human history.
I agree, and thanks heaven for that.
But that then completely kills your argument! You claim that every example of Communism has failed but then agree that there's never been a genuine example of it...
Surely based on what you've said you'd actually welcome a genuine case to show how the previous efforts have been thinly-veiled autocracies.
It will never work because humans, by and large, are selfish greedy assholes.
Agreed - humans are egoists who will always seek the best deal possible, which is why there will never be a truly egalitarian system, although there certainly could be one where rights are more balanced than what we have now.
Sure. But the people I've seen posting that locally come from the blame everything on Newsom and Garcetti/Trump is a hero crowd without critically thinking about how Bitch McConnell has let a relief bill sit on his desk since May, Trump has pushed for nothing to help them being so consumed with his fraud baloney. I got a notification today from Open Table to call your congressperson about a restaurant relief bill. That is an actionable idea that can actually help. Not just making these propaganda videos with an agenda to top 100K in personal GoFundMe donations, ya know?
Or our favorite sports league, the NFL.