A few thoughts about housing and affordability in the bay area
contd:<p>6. the world&#x27;s densest cities have the best public transport to move people around. we dont have it here in the bay area. it is appalling. it is a betrayal of our elected govt when they dont deliver basic necessities and infrastructure. high density construction should be built around infrastructure. but often, the state of CA builds homes, collects taxes and does not built infrastructure. this has resulted in fewer public services(police stations, animal shelters, fire stations)spread thin, overcrowded public schools, traffic clogged roads, lack of communal spaces and shrinking community services. there has also been an increase in crime, petty theft, misdemeanours and homelessness.<p>7. and then there is climate change. there is a global need to acknowledge that we are well past peak consumption. jobs cant be the engine that drives humanity.<p>8. capitalism has always been associated with material goods and services..and their exchange for monetary financial currency. this doesnt have to be so. capitalism can be modified to include a lighter foot print.<p>9. a future bay area needs to have lesser working hours and work days. adopting 3-4 work week is a good start.<p>10. creating townships in and around bay area and a robust public transport system will become crucially necessary for the region.<p>11. diversity is important. it is important in the job market too. stop churning out STEM as the only way to sustain oneself with a job. arent there enginneers and STEM educated workers who are also artists? It would take a deliberate grabbing by the horns to create value in other non STEM fields. like service or food or arts. This would take the pressure off the need to employ everyone in STEM related fields for a better than barely liveable wage.<p>12. there is a need for creative housing. example: Singapore has public housing for various income levels. 78 percent of the population live in these accomodations and the type of housing&#x2F;its location depends on their income levels and the number of children. these units are on 99 year leaseholds that takes away the speculative aspect of real estate while still making sure that there is a stability for the working population.<p>99 year leaseholds is a better solution that gives the working class mobility and flexibility to move whereever their jobs would take them. it promises stability in the housing market.<p>13. other creative solutions include co housing and co-ops. living with a smaller carbon foot print is sustainable and high density isnt.<p>in a one acre compound, co housing solution can create upto 32 to 16 homes of varying square footage. every 10 compounds should have an community module which includes schools, banks, a clinic, public services. this takes us back to the &#x27;village&#x27; style of living where services and infrastrucure are all clustered thereby reducing the footprint of communities.<p>14. housing affordability doesnt come from selling high density concept, but with more rental units. freeing up pay checks for other kinds of investments that isnt real estate. it is a beast that eats itself when escalating property values create more scarcity and more inequalities leading to more unaffordablity and bigger mortgages..causing overcrowding. everyone rejoices when speculative real estate sector heats up...not realising that it is contributing to the never ending hunger of a beast that eats itself.<p>for houses to be affordable, the speculative aspect should be tempered. the appreciation should be steady and even paced. when the real estate value are agitated, it is not dissimilar to wall street trading floors. it is absolutely chaotic and it is simply making life unbearable for everyone in the bay area.<p>15. traffic: need for public transport and 3 or 4 day work week. i should probably be repeating this.<p>16. cities ought to have local management and not under regional control. bay area has a lot of student population and immigrants. many of them dont vote or are a population that is very mobile. for this, we need a new kind of voting system for people to be able vote on things that is relevant to them.<p>for example, residents have a vote, but property owners who are residents should have a decision vote that is weighted more. investors and commercial property owners have a different kind of vote. this means that every local decision should be based on referendums and not elections every four years.<p>17. elected officials ..esp at city level should be handsomely compensated and bonuses awarded if they met stated goals. they work for the people and not for the govt.<p>lately i realised that my city&#x27;s council members are elected not to represent us to sacramento&#x2F;california govt, but are elected by us to represent ca&#x2F;sacramento and be bearers of tax bills.<p>local elected members shouldnt be allowed to proceed to higher offices unless the city they served gives them a vote of confidence.<p>18. every resident gets a unique ID that identifies their position. do they have kids in school..are they retired..are they home owners..are they businessmen. parents should have a higher weighted vote when it comes to school district elections. home owners should have a higher weighted vote when it comes to allocation and distribution of property taxes. renters have a vote too, but only weighted for matters that affect them. every city is different and has different needs.<p>i often think of how blockchain is used for traceability in ag and food system. it shouldnt be far fetched to put elections on the block chain. i have to think about this. i am not sure how it can be done, but it should be possible.<p>we should find a happy compromise.. california&#x27;s bloated big government is going to smother us all. we have an opportunity now...as it had never been before..to be able to redesign and remake our world. we also can fix mistakes and change directions and pivot re humanity&#x27;s goals. we can be better. right now, we  are all just human apes trapped in a little enclosure we call the silicon valley fighting for the same resources. and we are crapping all over the place..making our environment worse for future generations.<p>first things first...the pressure valve ought to blow some steam if we tackle the intense 5 day workweek rat race. thats from the working man&#x2F;woman side. we have allowed work and jobs define so many of us that we dont even see older people as part of our community. the same people who are in the fore front of protest rallies for undocumented immigrants and despair about the number of homeless people in the bay area dont consider for a minute that handing over control and power to the govt to keep on taxing us is a way to displace retired people. a community should have seniors, students, families for diversity and also for even distribution of resourves. if all the homes in a town are young families with school going children, the school system gets over crowded. if everyone is retired, then the town becomes a retirement community. if its just a university town, there would be noone contributing to the coffers for the running of the country. why do we demand diversity everywhere except when it comes to age? from the citizens side, there has to be a way to have more local control over our towns and cities without handing over all control to regional governing bodies at county&#x2F;state&#x2F;central level. the govt is only interested in higher tax receipts and it behooves them to increase cost of living to be able to keep sending the taxman. at some point, we will all end up working for the care and feeding of the govt.<p>what do most of us want at the end of the day? we want a good quality of life here in the bay area with a satisfied and prosperous working populace. we want a better cleaner sustainable california. we want a govt that works FOR us and not the other way around. it starts with local government by the people and not regional government by tax collectors.