Guest essay by Eric Worrall
During the Nov 20th Democratic Candidate Debate, Tom Steyer promised if he is elected President, towns and municipalities like Los Angeles will be forced to build more eco-friendly affordable housing.
…
Mr Steyer, Millions of working Americans are finding housing that has become unaffordable, especially in metropolitan areas, it is particularly acute in your home state of California, in places like Los Angeles and San Francisco. Why are you the best person to fix this problem?
When you look at inequality in the United States of America, you have to start with housing. Where you put your head at night determines so many things about your life. It determines where your kids go to school, it determines the air you breathe, where you shop, how long it takes you to get to work.
What we’ve seen in California is as a result of policy. We have millions too few housing units and that effects everybody in California. It starts with a homeless crisis that goes all through the state, but it also includes skyrocketing rents that effect every single working person in the state of California.
I understand exactly what needs to be done here, which is we need to change policy and we need to apply the resources here to make sure that we build, literally. millions of new units. But the other thing that’s going to be true about building these units is, we’re going to have to build them in a way which that’s sustainable. In fact how we build units, where people live, has a dramatic impact on climate and on sustainability.
So, we’re gonna have to direct dollars, we’re gonna have to change policy and make sure that the localities and municipalities who have worked very hard to ensure that there are no new housing units built in their towns that they change that and we’re gonna have to force it. Then we’re gonna have to direct federal dollars to make sure that those units are affordable, so that working people can live in places and nobody is spending 50% of their income on rent.
…
Source: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/11/20/tom-steyer-i-will-force-towns-to-accept-new-housing-units/
Steyer didn’t say what would happen to town mayors and other municipal leaders who object to his policies.
I accept cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco have serious housing affordability and availability issues, but forcing towns to obey a federal directive to build more houses regardless of local objections would likely be the end of urban green spaces.
And the left calls President Trump a fascist dictator !
Finally, an admission this is about COMMUNISM and dicatatorships. The Democrats have at least stopped lying about that.
It seems Steyer, who wants to be president, knows nothing of federalism.
Don’t expect the legacy press to splain it to him.
It appears to me that this is a California problem not a National problem. Shouldn’t the governor of California handle it instead of the president of the US.
Steyer has his hands on Soviet Bloc housing plans he can’t wait to implement.
To point out the elephant in the room, how bad would the affordable housing unit shortage be for legal residents of Los Angeles if the masses of illegal immigrants were not there?
His reply told us so much, yet so little. It talked about his plan for an authoritarian government, disregarding the constitution and the division of power. But he gave no details on his plan for housing; he claims to know “exactly what needs to be done” but rambles about “apply(ing) resources” and “change(ing) policy” without actually telling us anything.
He uses euphemisms like “direct dollars” to soften the reality that he actually means increasing taxes of the working class to pay for other people to have a free home.
Sustainable homes are not going to be affordable homes.
More insulation, triple pane windows, high efficiency furnaces. They all cost money. Lots of money.
What Steyer is proposing is for the government to build homes and then sell them at way below cost.
Once you do that you are going to have to create new laws that prevent the new owners from turning around and selling their subsidized house to someone else at full market value and walking away with 10’s of thousands of dollars in profits.
Reduce, reuse, recycle, right? That new development of affordable housing would probably be cardboard and plywood or OSB, maybe. Easy to put up, extremely easy to take down.
Tom Steyer is either a Russian agent or a useful idiot…or both. Dr. Hill clearly stated that Russia is using propaganda in the US to destroy the US Fracking Industry. Fracking and exporting LNG is a death sentence for Russia. Tom Steyer is the greatest ally Russia could ever hope for. Simply watch the video of Dr. Hill.
Russian Agents; The Real Russian Collusion – Kill Fracking Save Russia
https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2019/11/22/russian-agents-the-real-russian-collusion-kill-fracking-save-russia/
BOMBSHELL: Dr. Hill Exposes Russia’s Propaganda Campaign to Kill US Fracking Industry
https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2019/11/21/bombshell-dr-hill-exposes-russias-propaganda-campaign-to-kill-us-fracking-industry/
WUWT you should do an article on what DR. Hill said yesterday. This issue needs more attention.
Oops…
“Glass disaster: Tesla Cybertruck’s ‘Armor Glass’ breaks during demo”
https://www.foxnews.com/auto/massive-armor-glass-fail-tesla-cybertruck
“Musk exclaimed what sounded like “Oh my (expletive) God,” when the stunt went wrong.
“Maybe that was a little too hard,” Musk said as he laughed off the mishap. Undeterred, he asked von Holzhausen to do it again to the rear door window, which had the exact same result.”
D’OH !
Tom Steyer’s chances of being elected president are between slim and none, and closer to none, but even so, a U.S. President (or even an act of Congress) can’t override state or municipal zoning laws.
In many densely populated cities, the people who arrived there first bought the best land, built large houses on large lots, which are now worth fortunes. They also enacted zoning laws to keep lower-income people out, forcing them to live on poorly-developed land, and NIMBY is written into the zoning laws.
People can flee cities with high home prices by moving to suburbs (which can have separate zoning laws more favorable to them), at the price of longer commutes and higher transportation expenses.
If Steyer wants to lower the overall housing costs in a city, he should run for city council or mayor, and try to change the zoning laws of that city to favor the construction of low-income housing (which would still have to be built by private investors). But he will run into opposition from the wealthy residents of the city, who will probably bribe other city-council members to keep the zoning laws as they are, to keep “undesirable” people out of their wonderful neighborhood.
Probably part of what Steyer wants is a revocation of zoning for single-family housing. The authorities in Seattle just made a big step in that direction recently. They also have made it a lot easier to get permits to construct ancillary housing (aka mother-in-law housing) in back yards.
Hey Tom Steyer, how about donating your SF home to get things started?
https://virtualglobetrotting.com/map/tom-steyers-house-2/view/google/
San Francisco has a real estate cartel that self-regulates what housing of any size that get built.
It is made up of fellow travelers of Mr Steyer.
Visit SF and dump on it, literally.
Ah, that’s what US citizens really need: an ukaz from an oligarch. Bravo, Tom: great plan!
“The urge to save humanity is almost always a false-face for the urge to rule it”
H.L. Mencken, American journalist
“Steyer didn’t say what would happen to town mayors and other municipal leaders who object to his policies.
I accept cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco have serious housing affordability and availability issues, but forcing towns to obey a federal directive to build more houses regardless of local objections would likely be the end of urban green spaces.”
____________________________________
Utter Drivel!
NY Central Park “urban green space” remains due to instability for constructions”:
The building may sway
One potential downside with all that height is that it’s good for views, but not for structural integrity.
“Skyscrapers are going to swing in strong winds, regardless of how they are built,” points out Shane Lee at RealtyHop. “In the last few decades, we have seen many structural designs that allow skyscrapers to withstand high winds and earthquakes, such as the tuned mass damper [a device that reduces vibrations] in Taipei 101 and the concrete slabs in the One World Trade Center building. But skyscrapers are going to sway, and Central Park Tower is no exception—maybe 3, 4, or 5 feet.”
While swaying in a building 95 stories up might give some the heebie-jeebies, at least Central Park Tower is not as skinny as the supertalls at 432 Park Ave. and 111 West 57th, since this makes the swaying seem all the more precarious.”
https://www.realtor.com/news/trends/downside-of-new-york-citys-tallest-residential-building/