Slashdot Mirror
In America's Big Tech Cities, More People Are Now Living In Their Vehicles (cbsnews.com)
An anonymous reader quotes CBS MoneyWatch:
The number of people residing in campers and other vehicles surged 46 percent over the past year, a recent homeless census in Seattle's King County, Washington found. The problem is "exploding" in cities with expensive housing markets, including Los Angeles, Portland and San Francisco, according to Governing magazine. The problem of vehicle residency is national in scope, although its impact may be more "acutely felt in urban areas where space is more limited," said Sara Rankin, an assistant professor law at Seattle University and the director of Homeless Rights Advocacy Project, in an email to CBS MoneyWatch.
"Amazon, Microsoft and other big tech companies are in the Seattle area," notes Zero Hedge, adding "It is a region that is supposedly 'prospering', and yet this is going on."
Back in Silicon Valley, one Google employee slept in a truck in Google's parking lot for two years -- allowing him to save at least $48,000 that he would've paid in rent -- though many vehicle-dwellers apparently have non-technical jobs as plumbers, janitors, and even teachers. "A fair number of the 'vehicular homeless' in Silicon Valley are employed but are unable to find affordable housing," reports CBS, citing an AP article last November about "Silicon Valley's car people".
"Lines of RVs can be found near the headquarters of tech heavyweights such as Apple, Google and Hewlett-Packard."
"Amazon, Microsoft and other big tech companies are in the Seattle area," notes Zero Hedge, adding "It is a region that is supposedly 'prospering', and yet this is going on."
Back in Silicon Valley, one Google employee slept in a truck in Google's parking lot for two years -- allowing him to save at least $48,000 that he would've paid in rent -- though many vehicle-dwellers apparently have non-technical jobs as plumbers, janitors, and even teachers. "A fair number of the 'vehicular homeless' in Silicon Valley are employed but are unable to find affordable housing," reports CBS, citing an AP article last November about "Silicon Valley's car people".
"Lines of RVs can be found near the headquarters of tech heavyweights such as Apple, Google and Hewlett-Packard."
>> "Amazon, Microsoft and other big tech companies are in the Seattle area," notes Zero Hedge, adding "It is a region that is supposedly 'prospering', and yet this is going on."
> As the gap between the rich and the poor continues to increase, the middle class is steadily eroding.
7 years ago, when those smelly Occupy Wall Street hippies were protesting rampant income inequality, they were derided by conservatives and libertarians. The right-wing party line was something like "Any amount of inequality is just and tolerable, as long it was achieved through pure capitalist means".
For all Apple's influence in Cupertino, I doubt they could get the city council to approve an apartment complex that size. The NYMBYism out here is pretty intense.
We seem to be building 5-story apartments and condos all over the place these days. I've watched three, or maybe four, high-rise apartments get built in downtown San Jose in the last few years. That's not enough but it's more housing than I've seen be built in years. The question on everyone's lips is traffic. The roads already seem crowded, will this make it worse? I wonder if the new homes will be filled with people who already work here. If so, this will just shorten their commute and traffic will get better. If this lets companies hire more workers, it's going to make traffic much worse.
TFA says:
Amazon, Microsoft and other big tech companies are in the Seattle area," notes Zero Hedge, adding "It is a region that is supposedly 'prospering', and yet this is going on."
Indeed, economy metrics such as GDP can be good, but people can still live poor in a rich state, because wealthy individuals and big corporations managed to dodge taxes
California to charge you with 'property tax' for owning a vehicle.
(captcha:mooned... holy shit. thats.... freaky. ca gov moonbeam made this mess)
Back in the late 60's Arthur C. Clark predicted networked computers would make remote work possible for everyone.
Ironically, the people least allowed to work remotely appear to be those that allow increasing amount of people in other industries to do exactly that. Sure, that website's employees can all be remote and there can be no actual HQ to even speak of, but hell forbid that anyone working for Evil Tech Inc. work anywhere but at HQ where they can be properly monitored and recorded!
I'm going to go look at a bus tomorrow. It's cheaper than we paid for a high-top Sprinter and has half the miles. It's only partly about the cheap housing, and partly about fires. If you have to bug out from a fire, it's a lot nicer if you can take your whole house with you. The house we lived in for the last eleven years just burned down (two months after we moved out!) in a small fire in Lake County, CA, which even people living under rocks know is currently massively ablaze. We live in a redwood forest clearing in Albion at the moment...
The plan is to title it as an RV, at which point you don't need any special driver's license to operate it as long as it's under 40' in overall length, bumper to bumper, regardless of whether it's got air brakes or what the GVWR is. RV insurance is also incredibly cheap, while commercial vehicle insurance is credibly expensive.
If you give up fixed addresses, you can essentially make yourself a resident of another state, which has all kinds of advantages. South Dakota is one very popular option, because they have lax requirements for housecar registration, a low tax rate, and cheap registration fees. And you never even have to go there at all in order to accomplish your registration, get mail forwarding, etc. This is only my backup plan, though. I'm in contact with a registration service which claims it can accomplish the title conversion in 2-3 days.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
If the companies would put up buildings and subsidize their own workers and then provide shuttle service it could attract qualified workers into very high cost of living areas, while not contributing as much to the local traffic. One problem I did not see mentioned but I've encountered in downtown apartment/condos is parking. I would love to see a building that had apartments, a supermarket, restaurants, a medical facility and maybe a day care/school all combined. No doubt the corps would turn this kind of company district into a for profit trap, but the idea seems solid up front.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
it's oligarchy. Occupy Wall Street was shut down by a coordinated effort between the FBI and local law enforcement made possible by the Patriot Act (something they pinkie swore would never happen).
I think folks have figured this out, but after 50 years of gerrymandering, voter suppression and the anti-Democratic effects of our Senate and Electoral College I'm not sure what can be done. The Unions being allowed to die with the manufacturing base hurt too. The working class is completely disorganized. The ruling class doesn't have that problem.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
More things change, more they stay the same. We need strong unions back or everyone's quality of life will keep going down.
Less so in San Francisco proper but greatly available throughout Silicon Valley and even Seattle proper, there is PLENTY of property (rental and for-purchase) available... except they are in "undesirable" parts of town, along a major highway, tucked in an area with lots of low-income/no-income tenants, etc.
So there are options, it's just that most want a ready-made mid-level (or higher) semi-luxury palace next to a Whole Foods and a hopping nightlife. Like a Suburbia++ if you will.
Those options are always fewer and those prices are affected by supply-and-demand economics, but to believe nothing reasonably affordable exists is truly misleading. Want proof? Just check the property values of properties in "slums" and "dangerous hoods" and recognize how little it would cost to buy/invest in the same manner a professional developer would.
These problems are of these cities' own making. And continued by their inaction.
They need to stop with bullshit around the edges like rent control, legislating where people go to lunch, living wage, etc, and attack the core of the problem which is that people want to live there and the housing stock needs to double.
All these city councils are so preoccupied with "oh, the people living here can't be forced out" or "oh, we don't want to change the neighborhood", etc. Sorry, but you don't get to control everything and act as if you can have some kind of imaginary paradise with high housing prices, affordable costs, good wages, and low density. When you have people coming for the jobs, you have to give somewhere (unless you restrict people moving here which we don't in this country).
I for one side with the people who don't get to vote on these policies, who are trying to start their lives in a new place, and are the future to be invested in. Not the people who are retired, rich, and complacent in the houses they bought 30 years ago because they got lucky on the draw.
We will very shortly have camping mode in our Teslas as well as gaming... if only there was a toilet mode in the next software update (and electrically tinted windows)...
How do you patrol a beat remotely? How do you conduct an orchestra remotely? How do you mug someone remotely?
Drone, robot, robot. Wait, that's about a robot getting mugged ;) But seriously, it's only a matter of time. Battle bots are a thing. With the right one, you could mug someone. Or perhaps just a robotic mobile gun with a hopper on top into which your victim deposits their valuables.
Not everyone has jobs programming. Most jobs have to be done in person.
Service industry jobs have to be done in person. You can't repair someone's washing machine remotely. Yet. But it is inevitable that just as cars are designed to be assembled by robots today, all kinds of things will be designed to be maintained by robots tomorrow. If your appliances were designed such that all the goodies could be accessed from the front of the machine and manipulated easily by robots, then they could conceivably be repaired first by telepresence, and later by an autonomous robot. A car designed to be assembled by robots could also be shipped to a central facility (ironically, probably on a train) and repaired by robots.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Yeah, seizing assets of gainful corporations in the name of entitlements won't drive businesses out of the united states or anything.
How about we leave the fantasy land schemes behind for a while?
The housing problem is 100% due to NIMBYism. People that are already here can vote, and benefit from rising housing values. People that don't live here, but want to, don't get a vote. So the politicians represent the wishes of the voters and block new housing construction.
The "traffic problems" is a totally backwards excuse. As people are forced further and further out into the exburbs, their commutes become longer and traffic gets worse. At rush hour, figure two hours from Gilroy to Mountain View. More high-rise housing in the core of Silicon Valley would be a great relief to traffic congestion.
Some economic analyses have concluded that "progressive" restrictions on growth and housing contribute to inequality as much as regressive conservative tax cuts. The rich see their million dollar houses soar in value, while the poor are squeezed out of economic opportunities.
Housing prices we're going to normal after the 2007 bubble and the resulting 2008 market crash. Then the politicians and the Federal Reserve decided to fix it through home buyer tax-credits and 0% interest rates. Now house prices are back to record levels. Thank you for fixing the problem of low home prices, low rent, low property taxes, and low home insurance rates. Thank you. *Slow clap*
You know they don't actually have a trillion dollars, right? That $1T is the value of all of the stock owned by all of the people and mutual funds around the world, not cash in Apple's bank account.
If unemployment is at RECORD lows then why has this statistic increased? Seems counter intuitive
....here's a tip: MOVE.
The entire midsection of the country is facing unemployment levels the lowest they've been in 20 years. Real wages are going up, and the cost of living is HALF (or less) than it is on the coasts.
Find out what REAL "quality of life" means when it's not measured in Starbucks per square mile. Where you can actually see the stars?
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
Actually, better: no. Please DON'T move to the midsection of the country. It's terrible here. Much better to live in your car.
-Styopa
It's funny when people oppose a project because the developer isn't building enough parking, then they oppose it because of the traffic all that parking will bring. Seriously, you can't make this up!
Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
I've never seen a car, not even a camoer, with a shower ort bath.
Truck campers can have a shower. Conversions can have a shower. However, a common approach is to get a gym membership. This not only gets you a place to shit and shower, but also includes access to gym equipment, and maybe even a pool.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
More people who can start moving towards renting their own place - but there simply aren't enough places. The cost of housing has skyrocketed to a point where it is difficult to live near where you work. With rent in Santa Monica and San Francisco pushing past $4000 per month for a 500 sq. ft. apartment, most low-mid wage jobs simply do not pay enough.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
What a steaming pile of dung. During the same time period, homelessness decreased in California. Seattle elected 2 socialists to the City Council. It's a veritable bonanza of freebie handouts. Mobile heroin shoot up clinics, open air drug sales even on City hall steps, no chase/no confront policies, refuse to ticket or tow stalled/broken down vehicles in streets. Seattle PD is completely hamstrung and unable to enforce laws.
https://www.kiro7.com/news/loc...
Note from the article: 2 hours for PD to respond to a 911 call - hope you don't have any life threatening issues...
Seattle, population $714K has 1400 officers. Boston, population 690K, as over 2000 uniformed officers. The City refuses to spend where it's needed (like $12M per mile bike lanes). Along that same socialist thinking, just last week, the Seattle City Council did an about face and pulled $180M targeted for upgrades to the Mariners Stadium - and want's to put that $180M for homeless housing. even though in 2020, when the stadium is paid off, 30% of the $35M in bond payments no longer needed are already earmarked for homelessness. Consequently the Mariners won't sign the lease renewal. (Anyone want a major base ball team?)
If unemployment is at RECORD lows then why has this statistic increased? Seems counter intuitive
No, just a consequence of economics. Unemployed people can live anywhere (i.e. wherever they happen to be; they can't move easily even if they want to) but those with jobs tend to prefer to live close to where they work, hence they're more likely to move in that general direction. However, because employers want to keep wages low and home owners/leasers want to increase their profit, there will be people who get/have a job in one area but aren't paid enough to live there comfortably as the markets change. This is one of the reasons that suburbs exists.
Most people can't up sticks and move their home easily, but they still need/want to work. Depending on the state of the job market they may be able to find work near where they live... or they may not. In areas with cheap and fast transport, living far from one's place of work isn't really a problem but even so the cost of travelling to work compared to the home one can afford with one's income rises to a point where it makes sense for some people to skip the latter entirely.
tl;dr Housing costs compared to wages mean that some percentage of the workforce cannot afford to commute, and most people can't move home and/or job easily. Increasing housing costs increase the percentage, and the total employment increases the absolute number of people affected.
Because there are more people that there are properties. Those who have a home cannot trade up to something bigger because that would involve a longer commute, paying more in property taxes (set at 1% of purchase price - $500,000 home = $5000/year). So they upgrade and extend their homes. That pushes up the prices further. Then there are property speculators from China who want an "investment". If anyone sells up, they move out of state and push prices up elsewhere.
Some areas are too dangerous too live in, so they are off the property market. Other areas are too expensive. So there is nowhere left.
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
Is this the same part of the country that can't get proper "it's a human right" broadband? I thought all the geeky elite pinky sweared they're not going anywhere they can't get internet (like one's vehicle really has that). Also I noticed on that list "plumbers" which the last Slashdot article swore had better job security than all those with "hamburger-flippin" degrees (https://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12419342&cid=57041152)?
At work, at a gym.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
For a roof "tent", you only need to cut a relatively small hole in the roof for "access."
It all comes down to one problem: Proposition 13.
In a nutshell, Prop 13 artificially lowers property tax to an insane degree, and keeps it artificially low until that property changes hands via sale. What this means in practice is that if you own property in California, you don't want to sell it because until you do it is taxed at a way lower rate than it should be. This means lots of people hold on to their property, which raises the value of property overall. In turn, those who hold on to their property now find their property values skyrocketing because demand is nowhere near supply, and all of their personal wealth gets tied up in said property value. So for them to keep that wealth, the best thing is for as little property as possible to enter the market, to keep their values high. Hence, the NIMBYism you see rampant across California, particularly in SF, LA, SJ, etc.
Barring Prop 13's repeal or a complete collapse of the California economy triggering a wave of panic sellers, property value will continue to inflate as more people and businesses want to operate here but less and less people are willing to sell.
Democracy doesn't work that way. In theory, all citizens should be treated equally. But residents can vote themselves privileges that are not extended to future residents. Using permitting restrictions and zoning regulations to inflate the price of housing is one way. Tax laws like Prop 13 are another way. In California, two families living in adjacent identical houses can pay vastly different tax rates. New residents sometimes pay 300 or 400% more than incumbent residents, who are usually wealthier.
The ultra wealthy, like Trump, would love to build 100 story buildings for the over paid tech guy. When the over paid tech guy living in a 100 story building, us mortals can afford the crap they left behind, Why does Seattle have no 100 story buildings?
The dumbest thing they do is prevent building housing, but allow building office space. The obious result is that there are lots of people commuting in with now place to live. It's not hard to estimate the number of new houses that you will need when you build an office.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Building campuses, offices and business parks brings in tax revenue. Building family homes costs tax revenue for schools, community hospitals and police departments. Thus the existing residents don't want further growth especially when they have a fixed income and property tax.
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
They had this problem in medieval Europe. That was solved by an plague outbreaks. Then the shortage of workers gave the peasants the upper hand in demanding better working conditions. If they weren't treated with respect they would simply leave the landowner and go elsewhere.
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
FWIW, I live 24 miles from my office and it averages 60 minutes to get there in traffic. 90 if it rains. That sounds better than DC but I'm still envious of my colleagues in Durham.
As it is zoning laws and construction codes keep the number of houses limited. Doo goodnick liberal subsidized housing laws give crappy houses to people that would otherwise be blighting the neighborhoods of upper middle class liberals. We need to abolish zoning laws, construction codes and section 8 housing to fix the problem.
I was with you until you started ranting. Yes, relax zoning laws and make it easier to build new homes. Doing so will only reduce the price of housing (that pesky supply and demand thing). If rich gentry move in, they had to move from somewhere and now a house in that somewhere is available.
The second order effect is that if you start building more housing, you might also drive up demand ("Yay, more SF apartments, I can think of moving there now!"). I don't know which effect will dominate. Personally, I'd love to think about living in SF except (a) I'd hate my uber liberal neighbors and (b) I can't afford it now.
I would live in a class B camper out there. It is an automobile essentially, so it can park anywhere. Roll to KOA if you need to dump....plus you can take your home with you on vacation. Bike stored on the back. Fuck $3000 a month shitholes.
I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
Not to mention the national parks that are the size of some states.
I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
The dumbest thing they do is prevent building housing, but allow building office space.
Nope. That is the smartest thing to do. It pushes up demand for housing, while constricting supply, thus driving up prices. I am a property owner in San Jose, and the value of my house has quintupled since I bought it 20 years ago.
Development policies based on localized greed are not in the best interests of America, or low income people, or humanity, but they are certainly in the best interests of the property owners that vote for them.
Well fucking move to Sweden then. I'm sick of whining fucks that think the US is shit. Go the fuck on then to paradise in Europe. I lived there for years and it's got more than it's share of problems. And that was in the 80s, I can imagine what it's becoming with the Jihad moving in.
The weather is nice enough too, so you can live in an RV all year around. Only old timers remember snow in Silicon Valley. Nice outdoor weather and lots of affordable restaurants means you can take a quick walk if you don't feel like cooking in your RV.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
I take 50 minutes to get from East San Jose to Santa Clara, a trip of 14 miles. If I go on a Sunday it's less than 15 minutes, 12 if I don't hit any stop lights.
Just a whole lot more people on the roads in San Jose than there were even 5 years ago. The only real difference between San Jose and "real" urban traffic is the rush hour is only bad for a few short periods a day. People who can pick when they travel don't have too many problems. But the worst traffic is when parents are picking up kids and then running them to various after school activities. The area has almost no school busing.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Then we shall say, it is the most selfish thing to do.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Amen brother. I'm with you on all of that.
What, America is discovering that apartment houses are more efficient and affordable? There will be riots for another 100 years at least! What next, public transportation? Damn commies!
Why don't you ride a bicycle?
That integral roll-cage sounds like it would make some conversions more difficult, like were the sides expand out or roof raises, while camping to make for more space.
Sliders may be nice, but they're also sources of leaks. Raising the roof is not meaningfully more difficult with a cage; you just extend the cage. Everything hangs on it, so it actually makes maintaining structural integrity while raising the roof easier. I don't plan to raise the roof, though. I want to keep it low for clearance (trees more than bridges etc.)
One may also want to go with diesel because while the fuel cost more, the MPG is better.
Yes, one absolutely wants diesel. The fuel doesn't cost that much more, and the MPG is vastly better. It's worth mentioning that one absolutely wants a turbo to go with their diesel. Turbo diesels pollute less, and get better MPG.
I've also seen designs that fill the roof with solar panels.
Yep. It's more convenient on transit buses than most school buses because they have flatter roofs. Solar is definitely on the roadmap, so to speak.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
In the next city over they are living in tents...at least they have a car.
I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
Better yet, make them turn their space ship campus into apartments.
The renters would still bitch about there not being anywhere to plug in their 1975 model headphones.
"Duh...wazzat blue teeth thing?"
Then we shall say, it is the most selfish thing to do.
But nonetheless, that is the entire motivation for those anti-housing laws. They are dreamed up by people who own existing housing in an area, clothed in whatever "environmental" swill they think will appeal to simpletons, and passed by reflex action.
Build 50 stories underground and 5 above - oh wait, earthquakes.
Actually, the safest place to be in an earthquake is a man-made underground structure. The most dangerous place to be is in a natural cave.
Slideouts also tell the world it's a home. You want something like this to be as anonymous as possible.
It's called a mobile home in Europe. I've owned houses that are worth less than a modern RV. Homeless means living on the street or in shelters.
These people are choosing to be "homeless" to save 25k/y in mortgage or rent. When I was young I chose to sleep in my car over renting a hotel. It's a valid choice if you have a temperate climate and a pimped out van, my grandparents lived that way for a while too after retirement in order to travel but they weren't poor, they weren't considered homeless, moreover it wasn't a problem.
This is not a problem that needs fixing, the market will fix itself when people demand to work remotely from a more parochial town where they have a family. Perhaps companies will start spreading (like Amazon has been trying) and setting up in smaller sites in remote places. But as long as people choose to live this way and are happy, I don't see the problem.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
They're not poor in a prospering state. They're poor in a location that's inflating housing costs because there are more higher paying jobs. It's not the employers fault the landlords are raising rent because people are willing to pay $2000/month for a dwelling worth a tenth of that.
--- Keep the choice with the user..
Yeah - fuck nature. Let's build suburbs in Yellowstone!
That's why the rich are all "Progressives" and the proles and lumpen from whom they extract their wealth are "deplorables".
Ever tried that for a long distance in San Hoe? Do it, and you'll understand why. Personally I prefer the Subway, old & derelict tho it is.
The term you're looking for is "California Apartheid".
It predates President Trump (PBUH) by many, many decades.
There's no work in those places, my brother.
Large swaths of the United States have been in a state of economic collapse for several decades.
But shhhhhhh, it's super politically-incorrect to say that.. and probably illegal to say it on TV.
Permanent renters == overpaid?
Suuuuuuure. I bet you resent longshoremen and steelworkers too? Keep up the infighting, the oligarchy loves it.
Howâ(TM)s about we incent the big companies to stop their anachronistic policies of requiring employees to live in the silly valley and other tech ghettos?
Why don't you ride a bicycle?
I don't to die. About once a year one of my coworkers die.
Also there is an airport in the way, so there is not a very good way between my home and work on surface streets. There is a light rail stop only 3 miles from me, but it runs north-south when I really need to travel west-east.
But other than those logistics riding a bicycle is very nice in San Jose, it's very flat.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Well yes. If we don't let this progress out of control, they'll never create the sanctuary districts and the Bell Riots will never happen and Star Fleet will never be created. So, we've got to not fix this problem until these events occur.
The bus I looked at today has two roof hatches. They pop up for ventilation, and also open fully as emergency exits. Most buses seem to have at least one.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
correction:
I don't [want] to die.
Also, I'd like to amend my earlier statement about once a year. I checked and only 2 coworkers have died in the last 7 years while commuting by bicycle. Some others died while on bike trips. And one other died while commuting by motorcycle (great guy, really helped me out in my new role. And he rode the same make motorcycle that I do).
PS- I seem to have a lot of trouble using /. from my smartphone. I think the autocorrect thing causes me to skip over entire words. I'm barely coherent when I use that stupid thing. (smart phone makes you stupid? or at least sound stupid)
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Nope, I've never even been to your side of the planet :)
But for about 8 months of the year I ride my bike to work, 14.5km (so not 14 miles, no) and it's a pleasant ride, even if I do get hit by the occasional summer storm.
Of course, I'm on bike paths for 90% of the ride, and I'm on roads well before peak hour for the small portion I am on the roads.