zlacker

[parent] [thread] 56 comments
1. radu_f+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-02-17 05:05:36
> shepherding him through what one Recreation and Parks Department official described as the “arduous and achingly bureaucratic tasks” necessary just to be eligible for housing.

I'm going to risk a political statement and say that this is why I'm mostly hopeful about DOGE, even if parts of it are a shit show.

Building civilization comes with a hefty dose of institutional entropy, which keeps accumulating, despite (or often because) good intentions and competence. Everybody is improving their piece of the map, but this means you get stuck in a lot of spots of local maxima. Some can be fixed from a level above, but some need a round of creative destruction every 10 years or so.

I've read this yesterday: https://unchartedterritories.tomaspueyo.com/p/why-japan-succ...

It's a good read and a good blog for many reasons, but the relevant part to this conversation: Japan managed to keep a very high level of living even through decades of economic stagnation and aging population in large part by having a sane zoning system. Yes, that simple. They have 12, nation-wide, mostly inclusive zoning types. This means the permitted building types carry over as you move up the categories, allowing mixed-use development by default.

And indeed, you can actually go to Japan and buy a house for about the price of a decent car - which coincidently used to be the case in most of the world, before the double pressure of zoning/coding on one hand, and migration towards urban centers on the other squeezed the housing pricing way above what actual costs would have it be.

replies(17): >>croes+q3 >>crooke+T3 >>BLKNSL+F5 >>Philpa+D6 >>archag+L6 >>majorm+r8 >>energy+yb >>Tade0+Bb >>aprilt+dd >>BrenBa+Pf >>hatmat+Yv >>fergie+2C >>Fin_Co+Fb1 >>UltraS+tl1 >>namuol+xV1 >>evantb+Zc2 >>yibg+gJ2
2. croes+q3[view] [source] 2025-02-17 05:40:35
>>radu_f+(OP)
The problem is if you want lower bureaucracy you have to change laws and not fire people. Most of the time you still need them, they just have no time to do what they are supposed to do.

For instance, would you fire doctors to reduce bureaucracy in medical services?

replies(4): >>anon70+t6 >>rahimn+Pj1 >>gosub1+CH1 >>j-krie+tO1
3. crooke+T3[view] [source] 2025-02-17 05:48:02
>>radu_f+(OP)
How in the world is randomly firing people supposed to make anything more efficient? They literally don't even know what the people they're firing do, as seen with the latest mess with the Department of Energy.
replies(4): >>giveme+Ta >>clario+ce >>Workac+v91 >>jccalh+O32
4. BLKNSL+F5[view] [source] 2025-02-17 06:06:47
>>radu_f+(OP)
The necessity for delicately traversing the path to a solution that's more long-term sustainable than that which already exists seems to be something that DOGE is entirely incapable of.

Musk seems to want things to scale; fewer people to achieve more productivity. People that already fall through the cracks aren't going to suddenly find themselves better off via a system that scales better, because better scaling actually creates wider cracks.

The median flows better, at the cost of the fringes.

Your comments regarding Japan are interesting. Japan's definitely an interesting example to use due to the odd, unenviable economic situation, but that makes your point stand out more rather than less, I think.

replies(1): >>UltraS+Wl1
◧◩
5. anon70+t6[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 06:12:59
>>croes+q3
Great point. And if you fire all the insurance middlemen, but don’t get rid of the legal requirements which spawned those middlemen in the first place, you end up with medical professionals swamped with paperwork they shouldn’t have to deal with it.
replies(1): >>Dangit+kM1
6. Philpa+D6[view] [source] 2025-02-17 06:14:18
>>radu_f+(OP)
Such a thing requires a redesign, not an uncontrolled demolition.
7. archag+L6[view] [source] 2025-02-17 06:15:36
>>radu_f+(OP)
You think conservatives care about actually helping the unhoused? Their ultimate goal is to funnel money from public services into private hands; and their "solution" to homelessness involves prison, concentration camps[1], or exile[2] — because they see the problem as undesirables reducing quality of life for the worthy rich, not abject human misery. (Indeed, Musk considers recipients of federal aid to be part of the "parasite class."[3])

[1]: https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-polit...

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_homeless_relocation_pr...

[3]: https://atlantablackstar.com/2025/02/14/elon-musk-faces-back...

replies(1): >>bagels+iW1
8. majorm+r8[view] [source] 2025-02-17 06:32:54
>>radu_f+(OP)
DOGE comes from the political machine that believes more restrictions on eligibility for government assistance are a GOOD thing and that spending on such assistance should be dramatically cut.

So good luck with that.

Zoning as a silver bullet? When you have a huge economic difference as a conflating factor? If the US had had decades of economic stagnation the housing price pressure caused by the beneficiaries of many sectors of the economy NOT stagnating, but instead of booming at more-than-anywhere-else-in-the-world-levels, seen in SF in particular, would be far less.) Look at housing prices in hollowing-out former industrial towns in the Midwest. Economic stagnation and lower cost of living go hand in hand. Japan stagnated at a pretty high level, quality-of-living-wise. That doesn't seem like a bad thing. It's certainly not comparable to Nigeria, Pakistan, or Chile. It's also not comparable to the US. And do you know who else doesn't want the US to stagnate like that for the elite professional class? Elon Musk. (And Japan's economic situation has more than a few darker aspects to it.)

(Republicans also fucking love zoning, so..... again... wtf)

replies(1): >>aprilt+md
◧◩
9. giveme+Ta[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 07:02:55
>>crooke+T3
Maybe it forces the people who're left to prioritize which civil services to keep.
replies(1): >>aqueue+7d
10. energy+yb[view] [source] 2025-02-17 07:11:05
>>radu_f+(OP)
But DOGE, Elon Musk and Donald Trump don't have zoning on the agenda.

Trump's campaign platform was verbatim in favor of single family zoning according to his website. Harris's official platform was to ease permitting restrictions and provide incentives to states to reduce these regulations, according to their website and the multiple times they discussed this on the campaign trail.

Look past the marketing hype of DOGE and see that it's not actually deregulating anything that matters. The regulations that are blocking housing and energy are only going to be accelerated under this administration -- wilfully so.

The technocratic center-right have at times embraced deregulations like this, but not the new populist-right. The populist-right, if anything, see these regulations as useful because it empowers the immigrant scapegoat tactic as an explanation for housing costs.

11. Tade0+Bb[view] [source] 2025-02-17 07:11:17
>>radu_f+(OP)
> This means the permitted building types carry over as you move up the categories, allowing mixed-use development by default.

That is more or less how it works all around the world except the US. Or rather: mixed use is the default, outside of specific cases

replies(1): >>genewi+ik
◧◩◪
12. aqueue+7d[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 07:26:30
>>giveme+Ta
And forces states, especially poorer ones, to raise their taxes.
replies(1): >>gosub1+jH1
13. aprilt+dd[view] [source] 2025-02-17 07:27:35
>>radu_f+(OP)
I think zoning is THE reason for what the article explains (and thanks for sharing it by the way, it was very insightful, imo).

But how does fixing our zoning issues translate to, for example, firing thousands of IRS workers?

replies(1): >>johnny+N92
◧◩
14. aprilt+md[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 07:30:06
>>majorm+r8
> If the US had had decades of economic stagnation the housing price pressure caused by the beneficiaries of many sectors of the economy NOT stagnating, but instead of booming at more-than-anywhere-else-in-the-world-levels, seen in SF in particular, would be far less.) Look at housing prices in hollowing-out former industrial towns in the Midwest.

But the article isn't wrong though. Zoning things like Tokyo in San Francisco would be a silver bullet to the woes there and it would go a long way to making people feel prosperous. If you live in the bay area, you'll be shocked to see people with quite large net worths, feel like they have nothing because the only place they can afford near their workplace is $1M or more and we're talking about condos here.

replies(1): >>panick+Us2
◧◩
15. clario+ce[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 07:39:58
>>crooke+T3
It's probably not. At this point I would place my hope in second order effects. But I'm not the sort of person to do that.
16. BrenBa+Pf[view] [source] 2025-02-17 07:55:50
>>radu_f+(OP)
I mean, the other conclusion from that article is a negative, namely: constant GDP growth is not a great measure of success. Who cares if GDP goes up or down? What matters is quality of life.
◧◩
17. genewi+ik[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 08:34:35
>>Tade0+Bb
Cool. The US is the third largest country in the world; not all of us have to live above a restaurant or laundry. Or in apartments or other multi-tenant housing.

Those of us that want to can move to San Francisco or New York.

The state i live in has fewer people than metro Los Angeles. What works for them for housing is unnecessary for us.

replies(1): >>johnny+H92
18. hatmat+Yv[view] [source] 2025-02-17 10:32:53
>>radu_f+(OP)
Indeed there is administrative bloat everywhere, and I can sympathize with your hope that tearing down the current system will leave room for building anew.

However, it's hubris to assume that everything is bloat. There is the adage of Chesterton's fence, which reads: "...reforms should not be made until the reasoning behind the existing state of affairs is understood." Many things that appear to be bloat that serves a useful function, and tearing them blindly is going to do irreparable damage.

[1] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Chesterton%27s_fence

19. fergie+2C[view] [source] 2025-02-17 11:23:56
>>radu_f+(OP)
Despite the hype, DOGE is about replacing government employees with private contractors rather that actually saving money. Therefore it will almost certainly end up costing more in the long run.

At a high level, the current administration is seeking ways to cut tax for the wealthy and pay and conditions for workers. As a property developer, Trump has a literal vested interest in maintaining high property values.

Its really difficult to see how this will translate into more affordable housing for poor people.

◧◩
20. Workac+v91[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 15:15:32
>>crooke+T3
Fiery take, but Elon eviscerated twitter and just kept kicking people out seemingly randomly. Anyone who didn't like it was encouraged walk out too on top of that. Twitter was doomed and the internet was rife with how it's collapse was immanent.

But he we are three years later and twitter is still running and still top dog in the message-post space.

I can't help but feel that in the presence of lots of money, organizations just bloat and bloat and bloat, and all that bloat will be sure to have a long winded explanation for why it is _critical_ to stay in existence.

replies(5): >>UltraS+Fl1 >>jonkoo+qm1 >>jquery+qD1 >>namuol+VV1 >>sankta+P52
21. Fin_Co+Fb1[view] [source] 2025-02-17 15:27:14
>>radu_f+(OP)
I'm with you in that hope. There has been wild growth for a very long time. Realignments are painful but necessary.
◧◩
22. rahimn+Pj1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 16:14:52
>>croes+q3

  The problem is if you want lower bureaucracy you have to change laws and not fire people.
Not every excessive process is the result of legislation. Some of these processes arise gradually and unnecessarily, because, in an organization without competition, there's no pressure to be efficient (i.e. focus on increasing output).
replies(1): >>jquery+cE1
23. UltraS+tl1[view] [source] 2025-02-17 16:23:32
>>radu_f+(OP)
Elon Musk is a liar with zero credibility. All his claims about government "inefficiency" are lies used to make people like you OK with him shutting down agencies he doesn't like.
◧◩◪
24. UltraS+Fl1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 16:24:37
>>Workac+v91
Twitter is barely breaking even because Musk's stupid policies have chased away a lot of advertisers.
◧◩
25. UltraS+Wl1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 16:25:54
>>BLKNSL+F5
Musk is using DOGE to shut down agencies he doesn't like. The dude likes firing people WAY too much.
◧◩◪
26. jonkoo+qm1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 16:27:48
>>Workac+v91
Twitter is losing more money than before Musk, so I personally don't see how this is working out except as a mechanism to extract power.
replies(1): >>aketch+vo1
◧◩◪◨
27. aketch+vo1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 16:39:47
>>jonkoo+qm1
twitter corporate bonds are trading at 97 cents on the dollar now, they were trading closer to 40 cents shortly after the acquisition. I would not assume they are still losing money
replies(3): >>squigz+5F1 >>rurp+JJ1 >>bagels+5R1
◧◩◪
28. jquery+qD1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 18:03:15
>>Workac+v91
He also eviserated 75% of Twitter's market cap. The only metric Twitter is a success is Elon leveraged it to get Trump elected and Trump is now showering him with favors.
◧◩◪
29. jquery+cE1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 18:08:36
>>rahimn+Pj1
A business can become more efficient by focusing on the most profitable customers. The government is not a business, nor should it be.

There is plenty of pressure on the organizations to be efficient, the American people never saw a tax cut they didn't like.

replies(2): >>rahimn+bF1 >>gosub1+lI1
◧◩◪◨⬒
30. squigz+5F1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 18:14:57
>>aketch+vo1
> shortly after the acquisition

I would expect this to be a particularly low point. Can you link some data?

replies(1): >>aketch+WG1
◧◩◪◨
31. rahimn+bF1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 18:15:41
>>jquery+cE1

  There is plenty of pressure on the organizations to be efficient
What you say may be true in certain parts of the US. But we're talking about San Francisco. I've lived here for over 5 years, and my observations during that time do not tell me there's any pressure on governmental organizations here to be efficient, let alone 'plenty of pressure'.
replies(2): >>johnny+792 >>jquery+bk3
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
32. aketch+WG1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 18:29:30
>>squigz+5F1
"The banks marketed the deal last week with an intention to sell down the debt at 90-95 cents to the dollar but managed to price it at a higher price of 97 cents... In late 2022, an attempt to sell the unsecured loan attracted bids in the 60 cents to the dollar range which would have seen the banks take on a large loss on the face value of the debt."

https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/banks-sell-down-55-...

so I was wrong to say they were as low as 40 cents, but the point stands that twitter's financials have improved a great deal

◧◩◪◨
33. gosub1+jH1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 18:31:21
>>aqueue+7d
Or lower their taxes, now they don't have to fund useless bs
replies(2): >>bagels+BR1 >>johnny+A82
◧◩
34. gosub1+CH1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 18:33:47
>>croes+q3
For insurance companies? Yes doctors can be fired. They do not provide treatment.
◧◩◪◨
35. gosub1+lI1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 18:39:01
>>jquery+cE1
> . The government is not a business, nor should it be.

And it's not a charity either. So get rid of these wasteful programs that redistribute other peoples money that don't even work.

replies(1): >>jquery+Ai3
◧◩◪◨⬒
36. rurp+JJ1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 18:47:44
>>aketch+vo1
The massive interest payments he added match or exceed the entire company revenue. There is no way the company is even close to making money.
◧◩◪
37. Dangit+kM1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 19:02:31
>>anon70+t6
What legal requirements spawned insurance middlemen?
◧◩
38. j-krie+tO1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 19:17:02
>>croes+q3
You most definitely have to fire people. After all, their number one aim is to make sure their job still exists in a decade.
replies(1): >>johnny+y92
◧◩◪◨⬒
39. bagels+5R1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 19:32:12
>>aketch+vo1
That only means that the borrowers think that the interest payments will be made.
◧◩◪◨⬒
40. bagels+BR1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 19:34:37
>>gosub1+jH1
You think the states will get more federal money now?

The trend of stealing money from New York, shutting down the Department of Education, and FEMA would make me think otherwise.

41. namuol+xV1[view] [source] 2025-02-17 20:01:15
>>radu_f+(OP)
Can you point out the parts which aren’t a shit-show?
◧◩◪
42. namuol+VV1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 20:04:06
>>Workac+v91
> twitter is still running and still top dog in the message-post space

He just hasn’t finished the job.

◧◩
43. bagels+iW1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 20:05:18
>>archag+L6
Musk is the biggest parasite in the parasite class.
◧◩
44. jccalh+O32[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 21:04:59
>>crooke+T3
Agreed. Maybe the government is terribly inefficient. I don't know. However, this isn't the most efficient way to make it better. Moreover, efficiency is not just saving money which seems to be all that is going on.
◧◩◪
45. sankta+P52[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 21:22:15
>>Workac+v91
Twitter has become a hive of racism and hate that is a shadow of its former self. I literally can't keep racist slurs from my homepage, if you think musk has improved it since he took over man so I have a bridge to sell you
◧◩◪◨⬒
46. johnny+A82[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 21:42:36
>>gosub1+jH1
The explicit point of dismantling some agencies is to leave it to the states. Aka they want to reduce state funding. So the state choices are generate more income or let certain institutions rot.
◧◩◪◨⬒
47. johnny+792[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 21:46:40
>>rahimn+bF1
Are you looking in the right places? I'm sure all the big tech leaders put pressure on? But their definition of "efficient" may not align with yours or mine.
◧◩◪
48. johnny+y92[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 21:51:42
>>j-krie+tO1
But their job doesn't exist for another month of you fire them. They aren't replacing "unproductive" workers.
◧◩◪
49. johnny+H92[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 21:53:04
>>genewi+ik
Okay, no one was talking about your town. I'm not even sure if your state/town has zoning laws.

SF and LA have a lot less "living above a restaurant" because of those.

◧◩
50. johnny+N92[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 21:54:37
>>aprilt+dd
Yup. Top bad Trump's actual political stance wants to focus on single family households.
51. evantb+Zc2[view] [source] 2025-02-17 22:21:38
>>radu_f+(OP)
Really not seeing the forest through the trees on this one. The president is not supposed to have unilateral authority to axe written law. He's trimming the legislative branch, not the budget.
◧◩◪
52. panick+Us2[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-18 00:52:26
>>aprilt+md
Zoning while important isn't a silver bullet. Often cities who change zoning reform realize there is a whole lot of other issues that cause problems. But yes, zoning one of the most important ones.
53. yibg+gJ2[view] [source] 2025-02-18 03:41:19
>>radu_f+(OP)
Personally I can get behind the stated intentions of DOGE (although I don't think that's the real intent). I can also see the logic of having to break a few things / start over to really get to a clean state. But the way it's done doesn't seem intentional or calculated, it's just randomly smash things and seeing what breaks.

To put it in software terms, this is like doing a refactor without knowing what the current code base does, what the intended functionalities are and without having a design. Instead, someone just goes in to delete chunks of code based on the file name and see what happens.

With a random CRUD app that might be ok to some extent, but we're talking about people's livelihood, national security matters, environmental and consumer protection and such. The current DOGE approach using the most charitable take is either reckless or hubris.

◧◩◪◨⬒
54. jquery+Ai3[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-18 10:22:24
>>gosub1+lI1
If not working is so lucrative why don't you try it? I'll tell you this, it's not nearly as pleasant as you think.
◧◩◪◨⬒
55. jquery+bk3[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-18 10:41:12
>>rahimn+bF1
Efficiency isn't the number one goal of a democracy. You want pure efficiency, dictatorships are the way to go.

But for the most part, the things I expect the SF city government to do, get done. The roads are paved, the schools function, crime is kept in check, elections are held, permits are issued, inspections get done, etc. All to varying degrees of course. And the people get to change leadership if they feel things aren't going well (as they did in the last election).

replies(1): >>rahimn+qZ3
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
56. rahimn+qZ3[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-18 15:34:58
>>jquery+bk3
I didn't say I want pure efficiency.

I don't know what you mean about crime being kept in check. Right now there are several cars on my street with expired registration. Two of them have no license plates at all. I doubt they are insured. I have been the victim of crime in my home.

There are people openly selling illegal drugs on the street, with no fear of arrest or prosecution.

The schools spent $27k per student per year (i.e. $500k per classroom), and FEWER THAN HALF of students meet grade level standards in math and English.

It takes many many permits to open a restaurant, and many would-be restaurant owners give up part way through the ordeal. 'Permits are issued' doesn't indicate efficiency when the number of permits required is beyond what's reasonable.

The expectations we have of the government have to be related, to some extent, to the resources it takes from us.

If you spend $27k per student per year, yes I expect schools to run efficiently enough such that students graduate high school able to read and write.

replies(1): >>jquery+Cd8
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
57. jquery+Cd8[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-19 20:11:44
>>rahimn+qZ3
You want better govt, that's great, so do I. I don't think randomly firing workers like it's a video game will accomplish that, however.
[go to top]