Rents wouldn't be going up so fast if these protestors were protesting draconian building and zoning laws instead of Google employees. NIMBY-ism hurts lower income people first.
> <i>As a three-year resident of the Mission, I’ve seen the influx of money from the rise of Apple and Google’s stock plus the Facebook IPO change its character.</i><p>It seems weird for the writer to try to separate himself from this. The mission starting gentrifying well before 2010, there was just a bit of a lull at the end of the last decade. Not to put too fine a point on it, but he's a white stanford-grad who covers the tech industry for a website. Even if you're a poor recent college graduate with five roommates, your presence changes the character of the neighborhood.
I wonder how many commenters here actually live in SF or know anything about it... San Francisco has one of the most tenant friendly laws in the entire country. Rent control is very strict, and the whole "rent has gone up by X%" ... well it has gone up no more than 1% for existing tenants. Because that is the legal limit.<p>New units are not subject to rent control, but if you don't move, then you will never really pay much more for rent. People in my building pay 50% what I pay for the same layout, and new people will probably pay 2x what I am paying for the same layout as well.<p>Commercial property tho doesnt have rent control however. But that's kind of a different argument, right?
"Funding some local education or beautification initiatives could go a long way to reducing the gentrification backlash."<p>Or maybe California could relax its constitutional restriction on city and county income taxes, which would make much more sense than relying on random benefactors to make the city more livable.
I'll consider land use complaints from Miwok and Ohlone, but I'm not sure how "my neighborhood is different from how it was 15 years ago" is a valid concern. A vibrant city can't be a museum.
Why are tech employees and companies the getting the blame for increased rent? Last I checked it was the property owners and landlords who control that.<p>How far back do they want to go? Protesting in front of Tim Berners-Lee's house for being an enabling force in the creation of the technology that runs Google and other companies?
As someone who generally believes in free markets, I am already unsympathetic to these people. However the venom directed at tech employees strikes me as something more than just economics.<p>People are having a go at nerds because they can. The scales of social status haven't changed since high school, but it turns out that nerds can earn a good salary, and in the "fascist" free market economy, this means they can live where they like, and the police will even protect them!<p>I wish I knew about this so I could show up in my Google sweater.
What is the solution to this problem? You can stop rent increases with a law, but that causes lots of other problems.<p>You can get rid of the buses with a law, but then people will just drive or use other transportation, which causes traffic problems.
Anybody else watch the video? There were at least as many cops as protestors present. It's eerily reminiscent of those pictures from OWS where the cops were lined up outside banks.
<i>"Cheap grocery stores and eateries have been going out of business, while trendy bars and cafes move in."</i><p>Probably a moot point but do those new bars and cafes provide jobs? Do these people tip more or less than those who used to frequent the 'Cheap eateries' ?<p>I am sympathetic to the challenges of having a neighborhood go from affordable to "hip" (and not affordable) but does this bring more disposable income into San Francisco and increase the available money supply or not?
Are Google/Facebook/Apple employees living in that neighborhood because the company shuttle buses make it convenient, or did the companies start sending shuttles there because so many employees live there?
I showed a friend this, and he pointed out the awesome quasi-gonzo <a href="http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n03/rebecca-solnit/diary" rel="nofollow">http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n03/rebecca-solnit/diary</a>.
I can understand the outrage these displaced people feel. Especially for the hard working lower class.<p>It is not displacement for a public works project. It is pure class displacement with a rub-it-in-their-face quality about it.
The core problem here is that high-earners are being concentrated in one area. If the Google employes weren't expected to commute to a computer, and were free to remote in from anywhere, their economic impact on their neighborhoods would be distributed, rather than concentrated in a couple locations.