zlacker

[return to "Dear Jeff Bezos, instead of firing me, protect your workers from coronavirus"]
1. legits+kc[view] [source] 2020-04-03 16:23:33
>>jbegle+(OP)
I don't understand what is expected here. Nobody can get masks or sanitizer. What little there is is getting redirected to hospitals. It's not even a money thing.

This person is advocating boycotting Amazon and going to local grocery stores instead. What the hell? How is that better?

◧◩
2. dehrma+Le[view] [source] 2020-04-03 16:33:23
>>legits+kc
You can't get blood from a stone.

This reminds me of a class of housing advocates who insist a higher minimum wage or rent control will solve housing problems. No, you still have 1 unit for 1.x people; the overriding issue is supply.

◧◩◪
3. 0x262d+TL[view] [source] 2020-04-03 19:20:20
>>dehrma+Le
This is completely mistaken, sorry. Most west coast cities have many times more vacant units than homeless people. It's easy to source that and completely refutes the "supply" argument. But it's more profitable to build luxury units or keep them empty for airbnb than it is to build affordable housing.
◧◩◪◨
4. dehrma+YC1[view] [source] 2020-04-04 05:19:25
>>0x262d+TL
You're forgetting about all the two bedrooms in SF with someone sleeping in the living room where they all make six figures. And for that matter, that trickle down works for housing. As long a you increase supply that's affordable by someone, that frees up a cheaper unit. Now, this does induce demand, and as housing gets more and more affordable somewhere like SF, it draws people back in from places like Oakland.

The homeless bit is a false dilemma. While housing the homeless can be cheaper than the services they require from living on the street, luxury condos aren't making them homeless, and freed up inventory won't go to them, it will go to someone making six figures with too many roommates.

Homelessness is incredibly tricky because there are different causes of homelessness. There's struggling service sector workers living out of their cars, but there are also homeless with severe mental health issues and drug addictions (cue the SF Civic Center Bart station video). Housing them somewhere could make sense, and it's an inefficient use of money to do it in urban centers, but at the same time, it feels unethical to put the problem out-of-sigh in some remote ghetto. That, and you need coordination for any sort of homeless policy like that so cities don't start busing their homeless elsewhere.

[go to top]