Hacker News Reader

Comment by tivert | Hacker News Reader

> Sounds to me like a case of Greed vs. Greed. Ranchers want to soak the rich newcomers for 100X what they'd previously believed their own land to be worth. Rich newcomers want to buy at the old "owner had previously believed" prices.

I don't think so. From what I've heard, the ranchers want to keep the area agricultural, because the planned development would destroy their tight-knit community [1]. Not everyone is some greedy homo economicus that's only looking to maximize wealth like some SV capitalist.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/11/podcasts/the-daily/califo...

View on HN

One of the land owners is directly quoted as emailing in the piece:

"No one is suggesting that we don’t sell, the question is when and at what price."

Let's say that you own an item of sentimental value that you are not willing to sell, but if somebody would offer 1 billion for it then you would seriously consider to do it.

The farmers have no right to force the area to remain agricultural. Their actions here are incredibly greedy as theyre lowering the bay areas housings stock which hurts everyone else who lives in the bay.

"The farmers have no right to force the area to remain agricultural."

Actually, as a landowner you do have the right to add deed restrictions to your land. There are many land conservation organizations that do this type of work too.

> The farmers have no right to force the area to remain agricultural.

Personally, I think they do.

> Their actions here are incredibly greedy as theyre lowering the bay areas housings stock which hurts everyone else who lives in the bay.

Maybe the Bay Area should fix its own problems instead of imposing itself where it's not wanted as a "solution"?

> Maybe the Bay Area should fix its own problems than imposing itself on others as a solution?

This is the bay area fixing its problems. There are other methods I agree it should take but this is a group of bay area residents literally solving their own problems.

> This is the bay area fixing its problems.

By imposing itself where it's not wanted. It's like a country solving resource shortages by invading its neighbor instead of budgeting better or making its resource usage more efficient.

IMHO, they should bulldoze Atherton and build 20-story Chinese-style apartment blocks there, first.

I completely reject this idea that residents of an area should have any power to exclude others. These farmers dont live in a separate country. Im also in favor of apartment blocks in atherton for what its worth. We should do both.

I totally embrace the idea that these farmers should be able to tell some Bay Area billionaires to fuck off and "disrupt" their plans.

> Im also in favor of apartment blocks in atherton for what its worth. We should do both.

Again: first bulldoze Atherton and build 20-story Chinese-style apartment blocks there, then move on to the rest of the Bay Area. When it all looks like this (https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/building-apartment-...), then maybe I'll reconsider.

But, but... I can haz walkwayz? In 3D? And Metro, too?

How are the farmers lowering the housing stock? Are they destroying housing? Are they preventing others from building? You claim they can't force their land to be agriculture, but you apparently can force it to be residential?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com