Mözzerella
@cheeserush.bsky.social
here is where I would put my bike IF I HAD GODAMN A BIKE PATH
update I'm in Seattle I have a bike path now
autism (sorry)
Georgist - YIMBY
update I'm in Seattle I have a bike path now
autism (sorry)
Georgist - YIMBY
Which makes no sense, because housing markets in the US are one of the least capitalist markets in the US.
They are planned economies with a majority owner occupied demographic.
Left-NIMBYs are not going to face the fact that that the real working solution will look more libertarian then they like
They are planned economies with a majority owner occupied demographic.
Left-NIMBYs are not going to face the fact that that the real working solution will look more libertarian then they like
November 28, 2025 at 4:42 AM
Which makes no sense, because housing markets in the US are one of the least capitalist markets in the US.
They are planned economies with a majority owner occupied demographic.
Left-NIMBYs are not going to face the fact that that the real working solution will look more libertarian then they like
They are planned economies with a majority owner occupied demographic.
Left-NIMBYs are not going to face the fact that that the real working solution will look more libertarian then they like
So left-NIMBYism makes so little sense because we have a housing stock that is majority worker owned, and a housing market that is a literal soviet russia style planned economy, and we still have a god awful housing crisis.
November 28, 2025 at 4:38 AM
So left-NIMBYism makes so little sense because we have a housing stock that is majority worker owned, and a housing market that is a literal soviet russia style planned economy, and we still have a god awful housing crisis.
From another perspective, we can think market economy vs planned economy. Which is not capitalism/socialism strictly but gets lumped in there.
Which also loses, because housing markets are planned economies. The local government, using zoning, pre plans how much housing can be produced and where.
Which also loses, because housing markets are planned economies. The local government, using zoning, pre plans how much housing can be produced and where.
November 28, 2025 at 4:38 AM
From another perspective, we can think market economy vs planned economy. Which is not capitalism/socialism strictly but gets lumped in there.
Which also loses, because housing markets are planned economies. The local government, using zoning, pre plans how much housing can be produced and where.
Which also loses, because housing markets are planned economies. The local government, using zoning, pre plans how much housing can be produced and where.
Most homes in the US are owner occupied, which is inherently socialist, and there are many condos in the US which is also socialist. As long as they are not rented, owner occupied housing is capital owned by the people in its most literal sense.
Yet single family home owners are the #1 NIMBY demo.
Yet single family home owners are the #1 NIMBY demo.
November 28, 2025 at 4:38 AM
Most homes in the US are owner occupied, which is inherently socialist, and there are many condos in the US which is also socialist. As long as they are not rented, owner occupied housing is capital owned by the people in its most literal sense.
Yet single family home owners are the #1 NIMBY demo.
Yet single family home owners are the #1 NIMBY demo.
The problem is: The housing crisis isn't really capitalism.
There's 2 ways we can look at this.
One is from the perspective of the actual definition of capitalism and socialism, which is capital being owned privately vs government or worker owned capital.
There's 2 ways we can look at this.
One is from the perspective of the actual definition of capitalism and socialism, which is capital being owned privately vs government or worker owned capital.
November 28, 2025 at 4:38 AM
The problem is: The housing crisis isn't really capitalism.
There's 2 ways we can look at this.
One is from the perspective of the actual definition of capitalism and socialism, which is capital being owned privately vs government or worker owned capital.
There's 2 ways we can look at this.
One is from the perspective of the actual definition of capitalism and socialism, which is capital being owned privately vs government or worker owned capital.
I mean that sounds good in all, but communities don't usually own land. People own land.
If I want to build a quadplex, or put 2 mobile homes on my land. I should not have to care about my neighbors lived experiences. At all.
Local control is failed policy and I don't listen to failed policy.
If I want to build a quadplex, or put 2 mobile homes on my land. I should not have to care about my neighbors lived experiences. At all.
Local control is failed policy and I don't listen to failed policy.
November 28, 2025 at 1:12 AM
I mean that sounds good in all, but communities don't usually own land. People own land.
If I want to build a quadplex, or put 2 mobile homes on my land. I should not have to care about my neighbors lived experiences. At all.
Local control is failed policy and I don't listen to failed policy.
If I want to build a quadplex, or put 2 mobile homes on my land. I should not have to care about my neighbors lived experiences. At all.
Local control is failed policy and I don't listen to failed policy.
I love people who share my ideologies
The fundamental mindset that makes someone a YIMBY is
"I do not own my neighborhood and I do not get a say in what my neighbor does with their land unless I can prove objectively that there is a real and significant health and safety risk from that land use"
Anything else is NIMBYism in disguise.
"I do not own my neighborhood and I do not get a say in what my neighbor does with their land unless I can prove objectively that there is a real and significant health and safety risk from that land use"
Anything else is NIMBYism in disguise.
November 28, 2025 at 1:04 AM
I love people who share my ideologies
YIMBYism itself is ideologically inconsistent with so many different kinds of YIMBY ideas existing, sometimes in conflict. Most people's impression of YIMBYISM is "let the corporate developers build luxury condos" which kinda makes you understand why left NIMBYs distrust them.
November 28, 2025 at 12:59 AM
YIMBYism itself is ideologically inconsistent with so many different kinds of YIMBY ideas existing, sometimes in conflict. Most people's impression of YIMBYISM is "let the corporate developers build luxury condos" which kinda makes you understand why left NIMBYs distrust them.
YIMBYism has a media problem, one that left NIMBYs have capitalized on.
The general progressive public does not know jack about what is causing the housing crisis beyond "Blackrock is why I can't buy my single family zoned suburban home :("
The general progressive public does not know jack about what is causing the housing crisis beyond "Blackrock is why I can't buy my single family zoned suburban home :("
November 28, 2025 at 12:59 AM
YIMBYism has a media problem, one that left NIMBYs have capitalized on.
The general progressive public does not know jack about what is causing the housing crisis beyond "Blackrock is why I can't buy my single family zoned suburban home :("
The general progressive public does not know jack about what is causing the housing crisis beyond "Blackrock is why I can't buy my single family zoned suburban home :("
individual development rights > local control
November 26, 2025 at 2:49 AM
individual development rights > local control
you could solve the RV problem overnight by just making it legal for someone to rent out spare land they own for people to live on their RVs, without having to go through all the red tape of starting up an rv park
November 25, 2025 at 11:21 PM
you could solve the RV problem overnight by just making it legal for someone to rent out spare land they own for people to live on their RVs, without having to go through all the red tape of starting up an rv park
Internet Leftists: deregulation is violence!
"Marijuana decriminalization is violence?"
Internet Leftists: no no are you stupid??
"Marijuana decriminalization is violence?"
Internet Leftists: no no are you stupid??
November 25, 2025 at 9:58 PM
Internet Leftists: deregulation is violence!
"Marijuana decriminalization is violence?"
Internet Leftists: no no are you stupid??
"Marijuana decriminalization is violence?"
Internet Leftists: no no are you stupid??
the idea of deregulation being bad assumes that the wealthy and powerful never make oppressive regulations. Which is historically, wrong.
removing regulations made by a powerful class that exist soley to oppress a lower class (ex. 95% of zoning) is when deregulation is reliably a good thing.
removing regulations made by a powerful class that exist soley to oppress a lower class (ex. 95% of zoning) is when deregulation is reliably a good thing.
November 25, 2025 at 9:56 PM
the idea of deregulation being bad assumes that the wealthy and powerful never make oppressive regulations. Which is historically, wrong.
removing regulations made by a powerful class that exist soley to oppress a lower class (ex. 95% of zoning) is when deregulation is reliably a good thing.
removing regulations made by a powerful class that exist soley to oppress a lower class (ex. 95% of zoning) is when deregulation is reliably a good thing.
no, not really.
Leftists mean well but Left-NIMBYism is kind of populist right now.
Leftists mean well but Left-NIMBYism is kind of populist right now.
November 25, 2025 at 7:19 PM
no, not really.
Leftists mean well but Left-NIMBYism is kind of populist right now.
Leftists mean well but Left-NIMBYism is kind of populist right now.
if you want to give those people somewhere to go, pass a law that makes it illegal for counties and cities to ban mobile homes.
November 25, 2025 at 4:17 PM
if you want to give those people somewhere to go, pass a law that makes it illegal for counties and cities to ban mobile homes.
If this news outlet wanted to be productive, they would report how many places in California do not allow mobile homes to be placed on any other parcel of land other then a mobile home park.
It's by transit. Land values are high. Yeah it's gonna redeveloped because high rise housing makes sense.
It's by transit. Land values are high. Yeah it's gonna redeveloped because high rise housing makes sense.
November 25, 2025 at 4:17 PM
If this news outlet wanted to be productive, they would report how many places in California do not allow mobile homes to be placed on any other parcel of land other then a mobile home park.
It's by transit. Land values are high. Yeah it's gonna redeveloped because high rise housing makes sense.
It's by transit. Land values are high. Yeah it's gonna redeveloped because high rise housing makes sense.
The problem is there's a conflict of interest. You vs your neighbors. If your neighbors get to make the nuisance and safety law, you can't trust them to maintain your personal freedom to use your land fully. In law the solution is a separate 3rd party which is the state/federal government.
November 23, 2025 at 6:46 PM
The problem is there's a conflict of interest. You vs your neighbors. If your neighbors get to make the nuisance and safety law, you can't trust them to maintain your personal freedom to use your land fully. In law the solution is a separate 3rd party which is the state/federal government.
Yes, but people do have lease rights
That is, georgism, after all.
You rent the land from the people (land tax/property tax) and what you get in return is the right to use your land to what you believe is its fullest potential as long as you are following civil nuisance and safety law.
That is, georgism, after all.
You rent the land from the people (land tax/property tax) and what you get in return is the right to use your land to what you believe is its fullest potential as long as you are following civil nuisance and safety law.
November 23, 2025 at 6:46 PM
Yes, but people do have lease rights
That is, georgism, after all.
You rent the land from the people (land tax/property tax) and what you get in return is the right to use your land to what you believe is its fullest potential as long as you are following civil nuisance and safety law.
That is, georgism, after all.
You rent the land from the people (land tax/property tax) and what you get in return is the right to use your land to what you believe is its fullest potential as long as you are following civil nuisance and safety law.
if you look at developments built pre zoning, you'll understand that humans naturally want to use land efficiently.
It's local control of land use that has mandated the car dependency, setbacks, ect we have to deal with today
It's local control of land use that has mandated the car dependency, setbacks, ect we have to deal with today
November 23, 2025 at 5:23 PM
if you look at developments built pre zoning, you'll understand that humans naturally want to use land efficiently.
It's local control of land use that has mandated the car dependency, setbacks, ect we have to deal with today
It's local control of land use that has mandated the car dependency, setbacks, ect we have to deal with today
your local government should not be forcing you to build a suburban single family home with arbitrary setbacks and height limits
November 23, 2025 at 5:14 PM
your local government should not be forcing you to build a suburban single family home with arbitrary setbacks and height limits
yes, because of inefficient land use. Which is mandated by our local governments.
Which is why eliminating local control of land use is the way to go.
Which is why eliminating local control of land use is the way to go.
November 23, 2025 at 5:13 PM
yes, because of inefficient land use. Which is mandated by our local governments.
Which is why eliminating local control of land use is the way to go.
Which is why eliminating local control of land use is the way to go.
local control of land use is a failed idea
November 23, 2025 at 4:59 PM
local control of land use is a failed idea
rent control is one of those topics where the left is hilariously MAGA.
They will look at an entire field of housing policy experts and researchers all coming to the consensus that rent control doesnt work, but still want it because vibes.
They will look at an entire field of housing policy experts and researchers all coming to the consensus that rent control doesnt work, but still want it because vibes.
November 23, 2025 at 4:48 PM
rent control is one of those topics where the left is hilariously MAGA.
They will look at an entire field of housing policy experts and researchers all coming to the consensus that rent control doesnt work, but still want it because vibes.
They will look at an entire field of housing policy experts and researchers all coming to the consensus that rent control doesnt work, but still want it because vibes.