pillbinge t1_ixjgtya wrote
Reply to comment by 3720-To-One in The lack of homes could strangle our life sciences industry: Why the concentration of biopharma in Cambridge and Boston would ratchet up costs, exacerbate the housing crisis, and pitch the region from its throne. by writethefuture3
Not everyone in the suburbs has that sort of job, and not everyone in the suburbs is from somewhere else. The individual towns never signed up for this and are a lot weaker on their own, but the appeal to pressure from the top to develop Boston into a larger city is stupid. Boston has plenty of space it itself can develop but isn't.
3720-To-One t1_ixjhj4p wrote
Yeah… and plenty of the people who work in these places do live in the suburbs, and benefit from the tax dollars that those businesses being into the state.
Those suburbs don’t exist in a vacuum.
They can suck it up, and help contribute to more housing supply to increase the overall stock of the state.
Not sure why it’s always up to the cities to build everything, and nobody else in the suburbs should ever have to contribute to the well being if the state as a whole.
They certainly gave zero problems having their job locations being built in the city. They certainly have zero problem benefiting from things that are built in other communities.
Never mind the fact that said suburbs only really gave value because of their proximity to said cities… so yeah, they do benefit from these businesses setting up shop in places like Cambridge and Boston.
pillbinge t1_ixjlp7u wrote
The suburbs don't exist in a vacuum, of course, but Boston doesn't either, and it was never elected king, or set as the only place that matters. Boston's status as this regional hub or anchor city is happenstance and a result of bad planning, due to the congregation of larger industries - industries that are flimsy and end up being volatile. Dense populations benefit them, and conversations around how to build up to suit their needs aren't around the benefits of people.
>They can suck it up, and help contribute to more housing supply to increase the overall stock of the state.
Or they could not, showing that your outlook is in a worse position and built on flimsier ground. That's what's happening now. Continuing on like you've all but cemented your views and you're waiting for history to catch up is naive.
>Not sure why it’s always up to the cities to build everything
It's not. For years, I've said that if companies are coming in, they should be made to go to plenty of places around MA. Plenty of towns that would benefit from one lab being put in. Plenty of rejuvenation to happen.
The second I say that, people go on about how workers there wouldn't like it, or it's not a sure bet, changing the conversation, again, to how we can appease corporate interests.
>Never mind the fact that said suburbs only really gave value because of their proximity to said cities
Sounds like you're more just dismissive of anywhere that isn't a big city. Lead with that. Let people know what's really at the core. I like my city that's a suburb, but really a city. If Boston fell off the map, I wouldn't leave. Maybe the idea that people like their town is foreign to you. Maybe you grew up here and are in the phase where you hate it. Maybe you didn't grow up here and don't understand how this part of the country has deeper roots than, say, California.
3720-To-One t1_ixjmizd wrote
I grew up in the suburbs of Boston, buddy.
I know what I’m talking about.
And all these NIMBY restrictions in suburbs are rooted in selfishness and greed.
Again, your damn suburb doesn’t exist in a goddamn vacuum, and is part of the greater community. This entire half of the state has a massive housing shortage because for decades, selfish-ass NIMBYs all think that their precious little suburban was ordained by god to never change at all.
It’s the epitome of “I got mine, fuck everybody else.”
pillbinge t1_ixjn4hp wrote
So you're in the phase where you're growing up. That's fine. I was there too. There's a bigger picture you'll get eventually, when the numbing encroach of something bigger turns everything the same.
You can keep saying that "my" suburb, which is a city, doesn't exist in a vacuum, but I have everything I need here. And, when you say it, it still has the unspoken element of "and it should give way to Boston". Boston built up because companies could take advantage of what was in place. That may not exist, and the problems created today didn't exist before. These are problems we have to manage because of them.
>This entire half of the state
The whole state does, as do other countries. It's due to the financialization of housing as an appreciating asset at all, and increasing populations that aren't sustainable, and that are concentrated in fewer places.
Build a lab in Douglas, MA. But converting more space to lab space to homogenize the world isn't going to help. You're going to whine about this for the rest of your life if you don't recognize the real issue.
>It’s the epitome of “I got mine, fuck everybody else.”
It isn't, but I get why you need to think that.
3720-To-One t1_ixjrh00 wrote
Yes it is, dude. It’s selfish.
NIMBYs come up with all sorts of excuses as to why their precious little suburban should never have to change or adapt, or allow anything other than SFHs to get built.
Everyone thinks their little suburb is special and precious, and ordained by god.
And yes, they restrict new development because they think that it’s the local government’s job to artificially inflate the values of their homes.
And yes, most people living in suburbs work in the city.
Again, suburbs don’t exist in a vacuum.
But I get it, you’ve got all your NIMBY talking points down pat. Your suburb should never have to change.
“I got mine, fuck everybody else.”
There’s high demand to live in this state. The state needs to build more higher-density housing, INCLUDING in suburbs.
pillbinge t1_ixkxd5h wrote
>Everyone thinks their little suburb is special and precious, and ordained by god.
You're going through something, and that's fine. But people are allowed to like their town without thinking it can only increase in importance if it becomes a part of something bigger that is already established.
The fact you think I'm a NIMBY is precisely what's throwing you off. I'm for more housing. I'd love that housing here. I can just look around at what's being built, how badly it's built, and how horribly it affects the areas around us to know that it isn't working. Your approach isn't working. We're basically trying it now, whenever a massive complex goes up.
>There’s high demand to live in this state. The state needs to build more higher-density housing, INCLUDING in suburbs.
Sounds like you think government exists to cater to people's needs in some sort of consumerist manner. I feel really bad for you. Especially when the demand to live in the area comes from the historic ignoring of other parts of the state. Real estate is far cheaper and abundant farther West. But sure, build up some of the densest towns in the entire country again.
wallet535 t1_ixl3qx9 wrote
I think your basic point is that companies should look beyond metro Boston. As someone who grew up in rural Central Mass. and who now lives inside Route 128, I would love to see a lab go into my hometown. The problem, however, is the needed labor isn’t out there in the sticks. Just like a trucking company can’t locate to somewhere far from interstates, knowledge-based industries can’t locate far from their workers. Biotech ain’t going there, trust me. The modern-day mill is a lab or an office tower. Mill towns were built back in the day for their workers, but somehow we don’t want to give today’s equivalent workers that same housing security. This might help to explain why your attempt to don the mantle of the older and wiser rings a bit hollow. I’m sorry if that sounds a bit rude, and it’s not my intention to insult, but that’s the reality today.
pillbinge t1_ixtcm10 wrote
There are far too many people here who are reading something like "don the mantle of the older and wiser" when I'm chiming in with what I've reflected on and nothing more. It's very bizarre, and I feel bad for a lot of people. Maybe there's something about internet comments that cuts right into people. I don't know. I'm not giving any "wise" statement like that. Your comment doesn't sound rude, it sounds kind of sad and misguided.
More to the point, this is a fundamental problem with government getting involved but not totally, and only in some areas. They aren't going to move there but that's a problem to overcome. If not, we'll keep getting the situation we have now where apparently these labs can be funded by intricate laws about money that protect them but we can't get the work to places that could use it.
wallet535 t1_ixteimq wrote
It's hard to take you too seriously, because you told u/3720-To-One: "So you're in the place where you're growing up.... I was there too. There's a bigger picture you'll get eventually...." If you actually feel bad for people, quit posting word salad and start advocating for policies that might actually help them.
pillbinge t1_ixviir4 wrote
It's probably hard to take me seriously because that wasn't a conversation with you or for you, but internet forums trigger something in your brain to make you feel like you're in the thick of it.
>start advocating for policies that might actually help them.
Literally what I'm doing. You keep going on about how things should be while we can see things slide more and more where you don't want them to be.
dny6 t1_ixmbf00 wrote
You act as if you have a god given right to your suburban life style even as the region chokes
pillbinge t1_ixtcbq6 wrote
On one hand, people in the suburbs (where I don't live) do. They have what our society considers a god-given right to vote, to democracy, to their land, and so on. It's very strange to say they don't. It's also odd because there's some sort of inference to be made about what right Boston or the region has to other people's land.
On the other hand, I'm not invoking any of that. I think you're having a conversation that you've had before with someone whom you haven't met and isn't having that. I simply recognize where we are and am trying to build a real path out, instead of bitterly whinging.
dny6 t1_ixufzb3 wrote
Except we’re not talking about their land. We’re talking about other peoples land that they think they can control.
But yes, you’re right
pillbinge t1_ixviu8k wrote
I'm not sure I know what you mean. This is what democracy is - you get to vote on things that affect everyone as a whole. You get to do it at the local, town level and at the state level. You don't have to worry about "their" land since it doesn't make sense to vote on personal property. In this case, we'd probably be talking about making all property that of the state's, or closer to it; putting control of these issues in a small group so that decisions can be made more easily.
dny6 t1_ixvz6s0 wrote
If you have any interest in looking in to the history of housing zoning laws, you will find that they have nothing to do with legitimate democracy.
I have no idea what this has to do with state control of anything. Housing zoning laws have barely been around longer than most of us, “coincidentally” popping up all over the country following the civil rights movement of the 60s. They are new and failed policy with a horrible history.
Just build housing. It isn’t complicated.
By and large, you are mostly right though — in that the problem will be solved democratically. People need homes. Nimbys can live in denial about that all they want, but young people are clearly getting fed up
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments