[HN Gopher] Marc Andreessen slams new multi-family affordable ho...
___________________________________________________________________
Marc Andreessen slams new multi-family affordable housing
Author : DyslexicAtheist
Score : 45 points
Date : 2022-08-16 21:17 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (fortune.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (fortune.com)
| 8f2ab37a-ed6c wrote:
| Sadly, this is all very predictably Bay Area progressive. Yes,
| I'll put up the BLM sign on my window, but no, you cannot build
| anything for the riffraff near my Victorian, we wouldn't want to
| endanger the historic character of this neighborhood.
| Mimmy wrote:
| Here's a link to the original Atlantic article revealing Marc
| Andreessen's NIMBY-ism (also behind a paywall unfortunately):
|
| https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/08/marc-andre...
| ilrwbwrkhv wrote:
| I have zero respect for this crypto grifter. Try enough number of
| folks and eventually a few lucky ones like him emerge. Doesn't
| mean he knows what he is talking about.
| mushufasa wrote:
| Aside from all the hypocrisy etc... isn't this concept just plain
| wrong? Doesn't more housing + business increase the property
| value of an area? I could see the first-order effects being a
| reduction of surrounding property as supply increases, but the
| second order effects of more people are almost always accretive.
| The downtown area of a city is typically some of the most
| expensive real estate.
| themadturk wrote:
| Boo-hoo-hoo, Marc.
| helloworld11 wrote:
| >"I am writing this letter to communicate our IMMENSE objection
| to the creation of multifamily overlay zones in Atherton," wrote
| Andreessen and his wife Laura Arrillaga-Andreessen in an email.
| "Please IMMEDIATELY REMOVE all multifamily overlay zoning
| projects from the Housing Element which will be submitted to the
| state in July. They will MASSIVELY decrease our home values, the
| quality of life of ourselves and our neighbors and IMMENSELY
| increase the noise pollution and traffic." The comment, which was
| originally reported by The Atlantic's Jerusalem Demsas, was also
| reviewed by Fortune. Andreessen did not respond to either
| outlet's request for comment. The other executives who opposed
| the 58 housing units also did not respond to or declined
| Fortune's request for comment. Andreessen's opposition seems to
| represent a shift from his expressed views in an essay he publish
| on his venture capital firm's website at the start of the
| pandemic, titled "It's Time to Build." "We can't build nearly
| enough housing in our cities with surging economic potential--
| which results in crazily skyrocketing housing prices in places
| like San Francisco, making it nearly impossible for regular
| people to move in and take the jobs of the future," he wrote. In
| the essay, Andreessen also noted that his perspective was
| probably an uncommon one for someone of his ilk: "I expect this
| essay to be the target of criticism."
|
| The hypocrisy is delicious, and so typical of many ostensibly
| progressive tech magnates in California (and elsewhere). NIMBYsm
| at its peak.
| jjulius wrote:
| >They will MASSIVELY decrease our home values...
|
| Your net worth is $1.7 billion, you can fuck off with your
| concern about that one home of yours experiencing a dip in
| value.
|
| I realize this comment isn't in the typical spirit of an HN
| comment, but that's just gross.
| imapeopleperson wrote:
| I don't understand why NIMBY hate is in vogue.
|
| What's wrong with letting a nice town stay nice? We don't need
| to turn everything to shit just to satiate socialist
| schadenfreude.
|
| Build it somewhere else
| astrange wrote:
| Socialist? Letting you build whatever you want on your own
| property is the spirit of capitalism. NIMBYs are the ones who
| want every town to be run by central planning.
| echlebek wrote:
| Guess you aren't a people person after all.
| imapeopleperson wrote:
| How so? Ruining a nice town hurts more people than it helps
| AnonMessiah wrote:
| How does more housing ruin a town?
| t_mann wrote:
| If that's how you think, then at least I hope you're not
| writing massive essays asking (the rest of) _the entire the
| nation_ to build more housing, even if it makes
| neighbourhoods ugly.
| golemotron wrote:
| There's plenty of space in the US. Grow wide, not dense.
| It's good policy.
| standardUser wrote:
| "Build it somewhere else"
|
| Usually if the solution seems that simple, and you think
| everyone else is an idiot for not realizing it, then they are
| not the ones being idiots. It's a pattern we should all
| consider when we "don't understand" a widely understood
| concept.
| VectorLock wrote:
| >Build it somewhere else
|
| Okay... _where_?
|
| Thats the whole point of why NIMBY is reviled. Not In My Back
| Yard.
| lxgr wrote:
| And I don't understand why the idea that the only way to keep
| things nice is to never change anything, ever, is en vogue. I
| find it incredibly uninspired and depressing.
| armadsen wrote:
| It's not socialist to allow private entities to build the
| housing that the market demands on the land they own in order
| to make money. It's much closer to "socialist" to have state
| apparatus dictating that people not build housing.
|
| I own and live in an 80-year old single family house. My
| neighborhood -- one of the more desirable ones in my city --
| has had a massive ongoing build out of 3-5 story apartment
| buildings in the past 10 years. They don't bother me in the
| least. It's either that or people can't afford to live here,
| which seems bad.
| helloworld11 wrote:
| I have nowhere near the same problem with someone who claims
| the things Andreesesen does in his angry rebuke of this
| project, if that person doesn't at the same time preach for
| elsewhere what they very visibly don't want to practice close
| to home. Again, this is why NIMBYsm is so detested, not so
| much because of its specific arguments but because of its
| often overtly disgusting hypocrisy.
| mstipetic wrote:
| I really don't understand this mindset, shouldn't you stop
| caring about money at a certain point? So what if one of your
| houses decreases in value, you're set for life. Is it some
| weird money obsession/disease?
| VectorLock wrote:
| Once you're in the tres commas club, the money disease is
| fatal.
| davidw wrote:
| If you're fighting for market share with other companies...
| IDK, fair enough. If you're trying to stop people with way
| less money from having a place to live, that's just gross.
|
| And it's false in any case according to some of the research
| I've seen. It's housing. For people. Not a sewage facility.
| throwayyy479087 wrote:
| NIMBYism and it's consequences have been a disaster for the human
| race
| standardUser wrote:
| And very specifically for California!
| kieselguhr_kid wrote:
| I hope he gets the opportunity to die mad about it.
| anigbrowl wrote:
| Well, he has just invested $350m in WeWork but for housing...
| karamanolev wrote:
| Probably way above median housing prices and also probably
| above market rate for the size. Guessing backed by some smarts
| / conveniences. Whoever _wants_ to afford those - good for
| them. But we sorely lack affordable ones - no need to be fancy,
| luxurious or new, just affordable.
| lsllc wrote:
| It's not exactly WeWork, it's Adam Neumann's new startup Flow:
|
| https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/15/tech/adam-neumann-flow/index....
| newaccount2021 wrote:
| jwarden wrote:
| I have always wondered my community (Park City, UT) is spending
| money to build affordable housing rather then just paying
| subsidies to make existing housing more affordable. The estimated
| cost for the last development under consideration was something
| like $600,000 dollars for one unit, and that was a few years ago.
| I bought my market-rate condo at under $300,000 a few years
| before.
|
| There are plenty of lower-cost units available, and subsidizing
| rent/purchase of these would allow a small benefit to be realized
| by a large number of qualified people, rather than a huge benefit
| to a small amount of lucky people who win the lottery that is
| used to allocate the small number of inits that exist.
| mrep wrote:
| Prices are a little higher lately though. I paid $850k for my
| 650 square foot condo back in march. How big those $600k units?
| Macha wrote:
| Because the population has grown more than supply in most of
| the western world, leading the existing housing supply as a
| shortfall situation versus demand that exists. Therefore by
| subsidising purchases and thereby increasing the purchasing
| power of each buyer, you just end up removing one limiting
| factor on sellers increasing prices, and most of the subsidy
| ends up pocketed by the sellers in the form of increased house
| prices, which is both inflationary and not the policy goal of
| these programs.
| [deleted]
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-08-16 23:01 UTC)