I will regret making this my social media alias — Population should be factor in housing discussion...

1.5M ratings
277k ratings

See, that’s what the app is perfect for.

Sounds perfect Wahhhh, I don’t wanna
inferentialdistance
michaelblume


I should’ve realized – the real solution to the housing crisis isn’t to build houses for all the people moving to the bay area, it’s to realize that all those people should never have been born in the first place. If we just have the government restrict everyone to at most one child, the problem will correct itself in no time!

Alison, tear this dude apart

inferentialdistance

So your solution to this problem is building more housing in Berkeley, including advocating for the possible immoral destruction of People’s Park. A much better solution would be to advocate for limiting families to one child until our population is low enough that we’re not destroying our planet by our mere numbers as we are now. A much lower population would also eliminate the so-called housing problem.

FIRST WORLD FERTILITY RATES ARE ALREADY BELOW REPLACEMENT LEVELS YOU SLACK-JAWED JUNKSLUT! IF YOU WANT TO LIVE WITH CLOSER TO NATURE WITH MORE OPEN SPACES, YOU CAN MOVE THERE! OH, WHAT’S THAT? YOU DON’T WANT TO GIVE UP THE CONVENIENCES OF LIVING IN A DENSE URBAN ENVIRONMENT? THAT’S WHY EVERYONE ELSE WANTS TO LIVE THERE TOO, YOU MORON!

image
poipoipoi-2016

It’s not even that, it’s about access to jobs.  

If they would stop building office buildings, and build more transportation infrastructure and housing, the problem would go away.

But the simple fact of the matter is that moving to SF is worth a 70% payraise and the only way to keep Youngstown, Ohio from evacuating to SF is to keep the rents high enough that a 70% payraise costs you money.  

Source: michaelblume