The Bill That Could Make
California Livable Again
Atlantic,
by
Annie Lowrey
Original Article
Posted By: StormCnter,
1/15/2020 8:17:00 AM
You’ve probably never heard of the most economically transformative legislation of the Trump era. Granted, it has not yet passed and it might not pass. If it does, it would affect a large portion of Americans, but hardly all of them, unlike the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. And its potential effects are hotly contested by policy advocates, politicians, and economists.
Still, California Senate Bill 50, winding its way through the state legislature again this month, could generate tens of thousands of new jobs and billions of dollars of new investment, reshaping the geography of the biggest state and solving a large chunk of the cost-of-living crisis
If it’s in the Atlantic it should be there. Underwater and gone.
16 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
Skinnydip 1/15/2020 8:37:42 AM (No. 289040)
"Write a letter"? How quaint.
5 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
Highlander 1/15/2020 8:40:54 AM (No. 289043)
If the Atlantic likes it, there’s something wrong with it. Read no further.
27 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
Jethro bo 1/15/2020 8:43:33 AM (No. 289044)
Didn't take the turbo-lib long to blame the generations in the making, all due to Californistan's Dem leaders, housing crisis on, yes, you guessed it, Trump. Do these morons ever evaluate facts or just knee jerk blame the Rebublican du jour?
17 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
Californian 1/15/2020 8:46:25 AM (No. 289047)
Author is married to Ezra Klein, founder of Vox and creator and maintainer of infamous Journolist.
Her version of this horrible bill is of course trash and internally inconsistent. But, that was a given before I wasted 3 minutes of my life reading it.
15 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
planetgeo 1/15/2020 8:50:28 AM (No. 289050)
The ONLY thing that would make livable again would be to ban Democrats from ever having any say whatsoever in how it is run. They have completely ruined what was once the most beautiful state in the country. And they have absolutely no clue that they are the ones who have done it. In fact, they are continuing to "fix" the few remaining good things about it into oblivion.
I know. I just left.
29 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
MattMusson 1/15/2020 8:52:15 AM (No. 289052)
Actually, statewide and even a nationwide building code would go a long way toward easing the housing crisis. It would allow subassemblies to be created in factories and installed on site. You could order your entire plumbed and tiled kitchens and bathrooms and they could be dropped off and plugged in.
I have a friend who has spent 30 years for a 'manufactured' home builder. Their biggest problem is they have to adapt each model to local city building codes. His plant supplies only 4 cities instead of the entire state.
5 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
Highlander 1/15/2020 8:57:46 AM (No. 289060)
One more thing: I lived in the Golden State my entire life and have seen all manner of developments built during the housing booms. Homes built by capitalistic (and ethical) developers are the best homes, located in desirable environs and populated with families who invested in their children’s future. Cheap housing by low-bidders became instant dumps. This bill guarantees instant dumps everywhere, with high crime rates.
23 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
Knotwyrkin 1/15/2020 9:07:45 AM (No. 289074)
The problem is that the current situation exists from the over-stifling laws already written. More laws from a "Central Committee" will not solve this problem. The market needs to solve this, not some overseeing, elite politicians. Remove laws and regulations and it will be fixed.
8 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
mobyclik 1/15/2020 9:08:02 AM (No. 289075)
FTA: ''...could generate tens of thousands of new jobs and billions of dollars of new investment, reshaping the geography of the biggest state and...''
Have Texas and Alaska left the Union?
14 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
Sunhan65 1/15/2020 9:17:13 AM (No. 289083)
The author is idiotic, but the bill may not be. It sounds like it would allow for more building, which would in turn create a greater supply and should, in principle, lower-cost.
Of course, the article also contains much nonsense. The current problems in California are not related to the Trump Era. They are the result of 30 years of liberal policy and practice. And the idea that more housing will solve the so-called "homeless problem" is absurd. Street people exist because they are dysfunctional, and Left-wing ideologues refuse to recognize that and take the appropriate steps.
12 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
Laotzu 1/15/2020 9:19:00 AM (No. 289087)
The writer says this bill will ameliorate California's housing shortage by building more muti-family infill housing in violation of existing zoning laws.
* Wouldn't the same thing be achieved with absolutely zero construction, zero capital cost, and no environmental impact by deporting all illegal aliens?
* If the bill passes, California would become denser, cheaper, greener, and more affordable—a state less centered on car culture, and more centered on walkable neighborhoods. A "walkable neighborhood" in any Utopian jurisdiction is nothing more than a victim preserve.
21 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
cor-vet 1/15/2020 9:19:12 AM (No. 289088)
Are they going to be affordable to the homeless alcoholic druggy? If she was truthful, she'd admit it would be making a politically connected builder wealthy.
6 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
southernboy 1/15/2020 9:28:21 AM (No. 289097)
The bill is a wolf in sheep's clothing. It will allow low-rent multi-housing government-run complexes to be built in single-family zoned communities.
14 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
seamusm 1/15/2020 9:28:31 AM (No. 289098)
The 'central crisis of the Trump years'? Please! As if our current President has had anything to do with California's housing problems generations in the making.
18 people like this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
bad-hair 1/15/2020 9:32:48 AM (No. 289103)
So lucky you. You can live in an affordable 2 bedroom apartment with your drug dealing neighbors across from a pretty park filled with more drug dealing neighbors. And you'll only be a short walk from the bus stop for your commute. Sounds like New York City.
Oh wait !!! Isn't that where the Atlantic is published ?
10 people like this.
Reply 17 - Posted by:
earlybird 1/15/2020 9:41:27 AM (No. 289107)
How wrongheaded can a person be?
If the bill passes, California would become denser, cheaper, greener, and more affordable—a state less centered on car culture, and more centered on walkable neighborhoods; less responsive to the aesthetic complaints of longtime property owners, more responsive to the needs of young families. The central economic crisis of the Trump years—high inequality, a shrinking middle class, and an excruciatingly high cost of living—would become less daunting. And California would be a lesson to other states whose residents are facing jumping rents and long commutes.
California is just fine. We have always afforded it. My bi-weekly housekeeper and her family can afford it. Our kids can afford it. Their friends can afford it. They don’t live in Brentwood or Bel Air, but they do live in decent houses in nice neighborhoods. This is liberal rubbish.
They would turn our nice single family neighborhoods - most with modest sized homes - into sterile apartment boxes. Multifamily residences like the ones that have killed big cities and damaged kids. No more homes with yards for kids to play in, have pets. Just so more people can afford to live here? Meanwhile there are huge amounts of California territory that are barren. Why were they not developed? Because the nearest cities didn’t want to extend services to them unless it was done in concentric rings.
13 people like this.
Reply 18 - Posted by:
cThree 1/15/2020 9:46:40 AM (No. 289116)
#7 I don't think it's a good idea for the federal government (or even a statewide government such as CA) to dictate every detail of your home's construction so that manufactured home companies can make more money.
I'm so old (How old are you?) I remember when huge apartment towers of subsidized housing were the Great Promise.
11 people like this.
Reply 19 - Posted by:
GoodDeal 1/15/2020 9:55:26 AM (No. 289122)
I’ve been a licensed Architect in CA for 28 years. I have retired now and one of the biggest factors in going dark is the plan check and permit process has gotten completely out of control over the years. The very last new house I did was in Oxnard. It was a very simple two story cracker box house. S as simple as it gets. It y to took 2-1/2 years from when I signed the contract with the owner to final building permit approval. Twenty years ago the exact same job would have taken six months.
I’m over it. The intent of this bill is great but it will never happen.
8 people like this.
Reply 20 - Posted by:
Chabis 1/15/2020 10:17:32 AM (No. 289134)
I love their idea of "livable."
Funny me! I think of such somehow involving doing what I want with others I choose to be with while I leave others alone to do the same.
Pretty much the same spirit that led to the west being the west.
I guess that stopped in California. :)
4 people like this.
Reply 21 - Posted by:
jameshvarney 1/15/2020 10:40:14 AM (No. 289150)
More power to the state and less to the local community is a recipe for misery.
This bill will permit the destruction of quality of life and force hive like super density high crime developments with no parking and the destruction of quality of life.
6 people like this.
Reply 22 - Posted by:
snowoutlaw 1/15/2020 10:44:21 AM (No. 289152)
Of course if its being considered by the Democrats its the opposite of good. Sounds like AB 50 would make CA more like NYC by forcing more congestion. IMO Building more housing when there isn't any more resources like water is just theft from me and everyone else. I'm tired of going from a place with plenty of resources to now paying hundred more for things like water and power.
4 people like this.
Reply 23 - Posted by:
Chuzzles 1/15/2020 11:01:42 AM (No. 289172)
California's democrats don't do anything without having a motive behind it. I would not trust this bunch in Sacramento as far as I could toss the lot of them. Nothing except a complete change of the legislature from democrat control to a more responsible republican control, along with sealing the border and getting as many of the illegals out of our nation is going to make Cali livable again. The fact that Mini Mike Bloomberg is touting Cali as being a great role model for the rest of the nation should tell us all we need to know.
I realize the problem is concentrated mostly in the coastal urban areas of LA, SF, but geeze louise, that state is the ruination of its citizens right now. Being a neighboring state, I cannot excuse them any longer.
5 people like this.
Reply 24 - Posted by:
kono 1/15/2020 11:11:21 AM (No. 289179)
I reached where Annie referred to California as the biggest state and got a sudden-eye-roll cramp. But Atlantic likes to build up the spin cycle gradually, making the transition from reality to fantasy less startling to readers. For years I'd tolerate minor-but-blatant distortions like that, shrugging them off as metaphorical or stylistic affectations. But I'm tired of getting buttered-up like that in preparation for some fresh 'progressive' propaganda to be either shoved down my throat or rammed up the other end.
6 people like this.
Reply 25 - Posted by:
mc squared 1/15/2020 11:40:12 AM (No. 289202)
You would have to be living under a rock to not see what high-density, low income housing does to neighborhoods. More of it would make CA's problem worse when taxpayers escape the squalor.
7 people like this.
Reply 26 - Posted by:
Starboard_side 1/15/2020 11:43:21 AM (No. 289206)
There is an 80 square mile ranch about 1 hour East of San Francisco, which is up for sale after being in the same hands for 85 years.
1 square mile = 640 acres
It would be very easy to develop and ensure lots of low-income housing, if the state would just allow it, and get out of the way.
However, the state has set aside $222 million for land purchases to preserve open space, and this parcel is at the top of the list to remove from any possible development.
There's a 140 acre site situated between Huntington Beach and Newport Beach, but they are also working to remove it from possible development.
Another site in Fullerton, owned by Chevron, has been tied-up in lawsuits for over 15 years, simply because the people in the area don't want more development in their high-end home area - they want it to be a park, and have worked on securing funds to do just that.
Just South of downtown Los Angeles, is an old Sears building, about 8 stories, and abandoned for years. A few modifications, and they could likely house thousands of homeless there, and set up health clinics in the parking lot to ensure they have access to health services.
8 people like this.
Reply 27 - Posted by:
DVC 1/15/2020 1:33:01 PM (No. 289327)
LOL! One bill? You have to be kidding. The only bill like that would outlaw all Democrats in the state.
1 person likes this.
Reply 28 - Posted by:
RedWhite&Blue2 1/15/2020 1:43:58 PM (No. 289343)
Nuke Sacramento!
Start over with California patriots!
No ‘rats allowed to ever govern again!
4 people like this.
Reply 29 - Posted by:
caljeepgirl 1/15/2020 2:02:03 PM (No. 289364)
That headline is pure b*^%$#t....I pray this does not pass!!!
3 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "StormCnter"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)