Peter Ragone, a spokesman for San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, said the administration recognizes the problem and has begun a number of affordable housing initiatives, such as redevelopment projects aimed at producing more moderately priced homes.
No! You idiots! Less regulation and government, not more!
1 posted on
06/30/2005 8:59:00 AM PDT by
Skylab
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-27 next last
To: Skylab
And as the people leave Boston and Massachusetts, there's less socialist representatives in Congress. We had 14 electoral votes in 1980, we now have 12. That's progress.
To: Skylab
"Peter Ragone, a spokesman for San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, said the administration recognizes the problem and has begun a number of affordable housing initiatives, such as redevelopment projects aimed at producing more moderately priced homes."
So they're going to knock down expensive houses to build cheap ones?
3 posted on
06/30/2005 9:02:18 AM PDT by
Moral Hazard
(...but when push comes to shove, you've got to do what you love, even if it's not a good idea.)
To: Skylab
They just don't get it. It's the middle class that's leaving. The rich can afford to stay and it's a comfortable life for the poor.
6 posted on
06/30/2005 9:04:42 AM PDT by
LauraleeBraswell
(I will never again read another thing by Christopher Hitchens !)
To: Skylab
When all you have is a hammer, then all problems look like a nail.
Translation: Socialism is the tool of the Democrat Party.
To: Skylab
Fresh story in the local papers is that Joliet (located to the SW of Chicago) is one of the FASTEST gaining middle-tier cities in the country, because of its affordable housing. Many people are fleeing Chicago (and with good reason, in my opinion ;-).
Excerpt from the above-linked story:
With affordable housing and an aggressive annexation policy, Joliet has become one of the nation's fastest growing large cities--a rarity outside the Sun Belt.
Joliet ranked 14th among cities with at least 100,000 residents for growth between July 2003 and July 2004, according to Census Bureau estimates released Thursday.
As the far southwest suburb grew, the estimates suggest, Chicago saw a slight population decline.
Bucking the notion of growth fueled by condominium projects across the city, the estimates show that Chicago lost more than 13,000 people, or .5 percent.
The nation's third-largest city now has an estimated 2,862,244 people, down nearly 34,000 from the 2000 census, or 1.2 percent.
Demographers say that immigrants are increasingly moving to the suburbs when first arriving in the area, rather than landing in the city. Much of the city's new residential construction, meanwhile, is going to singles, couples and empty-nest households that are smaller than families leaving the city.
In Joliet, the new figures show an addition of more than 5,400 residents during the year, a 4.4 percent increase to a population of 129,519. The city has now grown nearly 22 percent since the 2000 census.
To: Skylab
Now those same people will move to new areas, and vote in the same liberals they voted for in Boston and San Fran. "because this time it will be different"
10 posted on
06/30/2005 9:07:05 AM PDT by
jbwbubba
To: Skylab
umm, let's see. homosexual capitals of the world are failing to increase populations.....this is news?
11 posted on
06/30/2005 9:08:37 AM PDT by
the invisib1e hand
(In Honor of Terri Schiavo. *check my FReeppage for the link* Let it load and have the sound on.)
To: Skylab
When I was a kid in San Francisco, I watched the population inch up towards the 750,000 mark. For some reason I thought that was a magic figure, three-quarters of a million.
I believe it briefly touched that figure, then it got the attention of the world for all the wrong reasons, and it's been downhill ever since.
Gilbert Arizona is looking better and better.
13 posted on
06/30/2005 9:10:33 AM PDT by
Publius6961
(The most abundant things in the universe are ignorance, stupidity and hydrogen)
To: Skylab
Queers don't breed too well.
17 posted on
06/30/2005 9:14:08 AM PDT by
Redleg Duke
(Getting old sucks, but it is the only viable option!)
To: Skylab
I spoke with someone who told of San Francisco's "price control" efforts - a controlled condo in a building full of $600,000 condos can only be sold for $300,000, and cannot be resold for more than $300,000 for about 30-40 years.
It isn't hard to figure out how this effects the market and the construction of new housing.
21 posted on
06/30/2005 9:19:00 AM PDT by
mvpel
(Michael Pelletier)
To: Skylab
More married heterosexuals with families will get you the desired result. Everything else is all a social experiment and total failure if I may add!!
22 posted on
06/30/2005 9:21:16 AM PDT by
bubman
To: Skylab
San Francisco is already the 4th or 5th largest city in CA.
To: Skylab
I suppose it has nothing to do with both cities embracing the homosexuals????/ (Nooooo!)
29 posted on
06/30/2005 9:42:18 AM PDT by
SweetCaroline
(Thank You GOD for watching over me.)
To: Skylab; All
Maybe the general population of those 2 cities SF, and Boston, have been terminally emotionally and financially 'fagged out'?
32 posted on
06/30/2005 9:50:33 AM PDT by
RSmithOpt
(Liberalism: Highway to Hell)
To: Skylab
New York is GROWING, baby! Take that Boston and San Fransicko!
And no eminent domain in Manhattan. Safest real estate value in the nation.
To: Skylab
Peter Ragone, a spokesman for San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, said the administration recognizes the problem and has begun a number of affordable housing initiatives, such as redevelopment projects aimed at producing more moderately priced homes.
Assuming you agree with redevelopment authority (big assumption!), it is laughable that the SF redevelopment is being sold as affordable housing projects... the most affordable areas in the city are exactly the areas targeted for redevelopment:
SF Home prices by 'district':
http://blackstone-sanfrancisco.com/198.html
SF redevelopment agancy project map:
http://sfgov.org/images/sfra/redevelopmentareas.jpg
seems to be a one-to-one relationship with the most affordable existing housing and the targeted areas... exactly how is replacing run down homes in the poorest areas with a new stadium, shopping complex and higher density luxury condos going to help 'affordable housing'?
To: Skylab
I think San Francisco's growth problem is related to the significant number of its residents who are unwilling to, or are incapable of, normal reproduction.
41 posted on
06/30/2005 10:02:31 AM PDT by
ZULU
(Fear the government which fears your guns. God, guts, and guns made America great.)
To: Skylab
But but but if everyone leaves, who's gonna pay for my Gubmint cheese?
44 posted on
06/30/2005 10:04:28 AM PDT by
TheForceOfOne
(My tagline snapped the last time the MSM blew smoke up my ass. Now its gone forever.)
To: Skylab
Census Bureau counts foreigners (illegals and legal) which has led to CA having six two many Congressional seats and a lot of States losing that shouldn't have because we did grow.
There is a house amendment submitted by a Rep from MI and co-sponsored by 23 Congressman including four from my State of Oklahoma which will change the word in the Constitution to "citizen" for purpose of counting people for redistricting.
When you read census, member it counts foreigners (legal and illegal) as well.
47 posted on
06/30/2005 10:15:32 AM PDT by
PhiKapMom
(AOII Mom -- J.C. for OK Governor; Allen in 2008)
To: Skylab
Boston, for example, shed more than 19,000 people, or 3.4 percent of its population But housing prices haven't gone down, as far as I know. I live in the exurbs of Boston, and housing prices continue to rise here. I hear people say that they're moving further away from the city to find affordable housing.
That may explain the drop in Boston's population, but the state as a whole is losing population. Outside of Boston, every other city in Massachusetts appears to be dying.
We're tempted to move, but I dunno. I like the four seasons and the diverse scenery within a short drive: oceans, lakes, moutains, etc. We've thought of Florida, NC, Virginia, Arizona and Texas.
51 posted on
06/30/2005 10:40:20 AM PDT by
Aquinasfan
(Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-27 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson