The question had a false premise, are you really this stupid that you can't read or reason?

I just did answer your question, it wasn't much of a question though...just hyperbole, like i said.

Like i said i think you are way off the mark, not to mention the assumption that poor people own houses in the neighborhoods they live in.

rent control doesn't mean not being able to fix anything, the question was loaded hyperbole from the beginning. So you need to do your own research.

Rent control keeps vulnerable people from being displaced, which is the issue with gentrification. What causes housing market failure and urban stagnation isn't primarily rent control, it's a bunch of other policies that stem from the days of segregation and zoning laws to prevent changes to neighborhoods.

Man i think you can answer your own question here, do your own research on rent control. And yes i saw you wrote a whole different response, deleted it and rewrote it. This new response isn't any better....

They use rent control in lots of places to avoid mass evictions genius, it is in fact a big deal.

However, there's nothing you can do about them.

Sounds like you've thought of nothing and you're all out of ideas . There's quite a few things that can be done, most prominently rent control. I'm not sure how you figured that out...

Your second part ignores the main reasons people don't want to leave -knowledge of the area, friends and family nearby, sense of community, having a job in the neighborhood. Calling it stubbornness and family heirloom sentiment (not quite sure what that means) really misses the mark almost completely.

You don't seem to want to listen to any of the replies telling you why you are being downvoted, like I said it's not about the data you keep providing, it's the way you are talking and the sensationalism

Your original comment was three sentences and the first and last one both were saying how you didn't understand why people live in California. It's just a silly comment based on taking the fear too far, that's why you get downvoted.

Nobody cares if it happened to be raining harder in Cali during that time and what the data shows, because it didn't cause that much chaos like the Pakistan floods or Somalian drought or something really life altering on a mass-scale. Almost all californians were fine then and are fine how, in fact we have other problems most of us would say are bigger.

Good analogy. Everyone here is pretending we aren't at the precipice of global calamity, cause it's been going up and hey look the past wasn't great either. Most of the happy preaching people just don't really care and that's why It doesn't affect them much until their own lives are impacted.

That's my point? And what are these wind powered ships? Surely they can replace all the super tankers and cargo ships currently in use /s

Ok I'm actually advocating for an overhaul, and abandonment, of the developed world's lifestyle. That was the original point of the first comment you replied to when you said that wasn't necessary. High speed rail just means adopting the least efficient form of rail so we can continue our fast paced, travel everywhere lifestyles. It sounds good and easy that it could be a solution but it's not.

Where are the actual, difficult, questions? Things like embracing population decline/veganism, ending any and all subsides for animal agriculture and electricity, banning international tourism, construction moratoriums, and massive increases in taxes. They aren't really talked about because they actually require more sacrifice than people are willing to make. ive realized that almost anyone still eating animal products while talking about techno solutions to climate change is basically a massive hypocrite ignoring the easiest solution right in front of them.

Pretty sure mass cycling is an overhaul of the developed countries lifestyle.

High speed rail takes decades to build, also requires lots of electricity and steel etc. Rail is more efficient that truck transport but not massively so. It still pollutes a lot.

Like I said, these aren't easy choices. And nothing you listed will stop climate change.

How would we make the shift to electric cars? We don't have the power grid necessary for the massive increase in electrical demand, both locally and in terms of overall power generation.

What technologies exist now to supplant the shipping and aviation industry with carbon free alternatices? None, really, that are close to being scalable.

It's not as simple as you make it seem even if the political obstacles were removed.

The developed world can't just continue business as usual by pretending we can electrify all our problems away while living the same lifestyle