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."
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.
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 ?
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)...
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*
Occupy Wall Street was shut down by a coordinated effort between the FBI and local law enforcement
Nope. OWS faded away because they had no organization or leadership, no coherent goals or objectives, and were completely ineffective at catalyzing change or allying with existing politicians or electing new politicians.
Contrast OWS with another organization formed around the same time: The Tea Party. Both were created in reaction to the financial crisis and the bank bailout. But the Tea Party didn't fade away. They were organized. They had coherent, specific, and realistic goals. They formed alliances and endorsed politicians. The ejected incumbents, and elected a tidal wave of new representatives.
OWS has faded away, and may someday merit a small footnote in a history book.
The Tea Party has revolutionized American politics, and is now running the country.
....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 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.
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