Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

AftyOfTheUK t1_j9vgijv wrote

>It is a problem because there is no middle class housing.

Middle Class in a city in San Francisco simply has different income requirements to other cities. All cities are different.

>These laws and similar start with the assumption that the poor will always be poor and that no change is ever possible in someone’s life

The laws have nothing to do with changing circumstances, they simply force everyone else to subsidise people who don't earn a lot of money.

>When you install policies like this, you pull rungs from the ladder.

I agree, I don't like affordable housing policies because they've fucked me over for most of my life. I've been renting, and paying out of the ass to rent, because the properties I'm renting are in the band that's subsidising affordable housing.

I'm 44 and don't own a house. A friend of mine bought an affordable unit in a neighbourhood I lived in over 15 years ago. He's got his house bought and paid for, completely paid off, yet I don't own one despite subsidizing him with both my taxes and increased rent.

1

kippypapa t1_j9vitgr wrote

Right, your living my exact same life almost. If I get a worse paying job and move to SF, I’d qualify for a below market rate condo or section 8 and be fine. I’ve honestly considered it but the BMR stuff in SF is a dumpster fire. I was living in LA, and as you say, paying tax and high rent so my neighbors could live cheaply.

A big draw of SF are the amenities. If you didn’t have rent control, section 8, and BMR, low income people would leave. That would mean fewer restaurants, fewer bars, clubs, cultural events, etc making it less attractive and more people would leave. Eventually, the city would find its balance between people, wages and business. The way we do it now, we create these imbalances where the rich get cheap labor, the poor get stuck and everyone else gets fucked. If we just let the free market work, we wouldn’t be in such a mess.

1