Bah. San Francisco is an inanimate geographical region. It has no needs, and inanimate objects hate it when you anthropomorphize them.
Instead of asking "does san francisco need more people" let's put actual actors into these decisions. Would it be beneficial to the set of individuals currently residing in San Francisco to have more housing stock in San Francisco? Would it be beneficial to others in the Bay Area, or to humanity at large?
The answers to these questions may be different. Indeed, that is sort of the premise of the article: existing residents benefit greatly from the various restrictions on building, to the detriment of all others. :P
Comments
Bah. San Francisco is an inanimate geographical region. It has no needs, and inanimate objects hate it when you anthropomorphize them.
Instead of asking "does san francisco need more people" let's put actual actors into these decisions. Would it be beneficial to the set of individuals currently residing in San Francisco to have more housing stock in San Francisco? Would it be beneficial to others in the Bay Area, or to humanity at large?
The answers to these questions may be different. Indeed, that is sort of the premise of the article: existing residents benefit greatly from the various restrictions on building, to the detriment of all others. :P
That is what I meant. The anthropomorphism was a shorthand. :)