หมวดหมู่ของบทความนี้จะเกี่ยวกับnot in my backyard หากคุณกำลังมองหาnot in my backyardมาเรียนรู้เกี่ยวกับหัวข้อnot in my backyardกับOldeEnglishConsortiumในโพสต์Are NIMBYs Selfish?นี้.

สรุปเนื้อหาที่เกี่ยวข้องเกี่ยวกับnot in my backyardในAre NIMBYs Selfish?ล่าสุด

ชมวิดีโอด้านล่างเลย

ที่เว็บไซต์OldeEnglishConsortiumคุณสามารถอัปเดตข้อมูลอื่นนอกเหนือจากnot in my backyardได้รับความรู้ที่มีคุณค่ามากขึ้นสำหรับคุณ ในหน้าOlde English Consortium เราอัพเดทข่าวใหม่และแม่นยำทุกวันสำหรับคุณ, ด้วยความหวังว่าจะได้ให้บริการข้อมูลที่ละเอียดที่สุดแก่ผู้ใช้งาน ช่วยให้คุณเพิ่มข่าวออนไลน์ได้โดยเร็วที่สุด.

เนื้อหาบางส่วนที่เกี่ยวข้องกับหมวดหมู่not in my backyard

เริ่มสร้างกิจวัตรประจำวันในอุดมคติของคุณ! 100 คนแรกที่คลิกลิงก์จะได้รับส่วนลด 25% สำหรับ Fabulous Premium: วิดีโอนี้พูดถึงแนวคิด “ไม่ได้อยู่ในสวนหลังบ้านของฉัน” โดยใช้ฉากหลังเป็นซานฟรานซิสโก วิดีโอเกี่ยวกับ Nebula นี้: ฉันอยู่ใน Patreon! พิจารณาสนับสนุนช่องนี้: แหล่งข้อมูลในหัวข้อนี้: การสำรวจผู้อยู่อาศัยในบริเวณอ่าว: การแบ่งเขตครอบครัวเดี่ยวใน SF: ทบทวนการแบ่งเขต “RH” ใน SF: บทความวารสารยอดเยี่ยมเกี่ยวกับ NIMBYism: การอนุรักษ์ประวัติศาสตร์เทียบกับความสามารถในการจ่าย: Seattle Housing to Office ตัวอย่าง: บทความในวารสารบน การวิเคราะห์ต้นทุนและผลประโยชน์สำหรับการอนุรักษ์ประวัติศาสตร์: บทความในวารสารเกี่ยวกับ NIMBYs ระดับกลางบน: บทความในวารสาร: “Understanding and Overcoming the NIMBY Syndrome”: ตัวอย่างของการถกเถียง NIMBY ใน SF: ตัวอย่างของ NIMBYs ที่ไม่ตรงข้ามกับที่อยู่อาศัยราคาไม่แพงในทางทฤษฎี แต่ ต่อต้านมันในสวนหลังบ้านของพวกเขา: บทความในวารสารที่อธิบายถึงความขัดแย้งของ NIMBY ใน SF: บทความในวารสารเกี่ยวกับความคิดของ NIMBY: ผลิตโดย Dave Amos และทีมงานที่ดีที่ Standard Studios เลือกรูปภาพและวิดีโอจาก Getty Images ชีวิตคนดำมีความสำคัญ .

ภาพถ่ายบางส่วนที่เกี่ยวข้องกับเนื้อหาของnot in my backyard

Are NIMBYs Selfish?
Are NIMBYs Selfish?

นอกจากดูข่าวเกี่ยวกับบทความนี้แล้ว Are NIMBYs Selfish? คุณสามารถดูเนื้อหาเพิ่มเติมด้านล่าง

คลิกที่นี่

เนื้อหาเกี่ยวกับnot in my backyard

#NIMBYs #Selfish.

city planning,town planning,urban planning,urban design.

Are NIMBYs Selfish?.

not in my backyard.

เราหวังว่าการแบ่งปันที่เราให้ไว้จะเป็นประโยชน์กับคุณ ขอขอบคุณที่อ่านบทความของเราเกี่ยวกับnot in my backyard

40 thoughts on “Are NIMBYs Selfish? | เนื้อหาทั้งหมดที่เกี่ยวข้องกับnot in my backyardเพิ่งได้รับการอัปเดต

  1. Hezekiah Ramirez says:

    Maybe but that doesn't make them wrong. I live in a bad neighborhood. The people here are not saintly salt of the Earth people who don't have an enemy in the world. They tend to be violent uncivilized trash. Gang members are not fictional creatures you only see in movies. It's a real problem. There's trash strewn about and graffiti is everywhere. There are condoms, crack pipes, syringes, etc. all over the place. The noise pollution is absurd. Fights and murders are very common. These are not great people, mostly. Why would a peaceful civilized community that doesn't have much crime want the worst people in the area near them? Why would you want your neighborhood to become a cesspool? That's what happens. The people here are not the same as normal successful people. I know it's not PC to acknowledge that but it's the truth. Many of them are lazy, stupid, violent, toxic, and entitled. I know we don't want to say that out loud but sometimes those things need to be said. It's perfectly understandable that civilized people don't want to be mugged when they leave their homes after sunset

  2. 1000rogueleader says:

    You can't just support some NIMBYism just because its done by groups you are sympathetic to. If you oppose NIMBYism in principle, you have to oppose all of it, because the mindset behind ethnic enclave NIMBYism and white NIMBYism is ultimately the same: they want to protect their neighborhoods from outsiders, developers, and "the government/the man".

  3. Soen says:

    Suburban NIMBYs want the quiet of a low-traffic neighborhood without realizing the more they distance themselves from traffic, the more traffic they themselves create. It's a clear self-perpetuating chicken-and-egg problem, but most of them don't realize it.

  4. RZPogi says:

    I would take no zoning laws like here in the Philippines rather US-style zoning. We can almost go to any place for only about an hour, more or less either by car, bike, or public transport.

    NIMBYs and their areas are basically shunned here and their lands and homes depreciate in value fast.

  5. bb1111116 says:

    NIMBY can include any group. The group who wants more bike paths for instance could pull the NIMBY card against a new highway. Everyone is in favor of something and as a result, they are against something which confits with what they want.
    In a democracy that gets worked out through the democratic process.

  6. Dave says:

    The urban areas of cities should de-annex the suburban parts and let the residents find ways to provide their own services/infrastructure maintenance. Let them keep their backyards, but force them to actually pay for it.

  7. Jay Ski says:

    I've lived in all types of housing. Apartments as high as the 41st floor and as low as a windowless basement. Several single family homes, most on suburban lots but one surrounded by 30 acres of forest. And the appeal to me of the single family home is the ability it gives you to disengage from your community at the end of the day. When I'm done working, I'm done dealing with other people. I don't want to hear my neighbors, I don't want to smell what they're cooking for diner, and I certainly don't want to feel their sub woofers thumping thru the walls or ceiling. When architects can solve those issues, I'll move back into high rises again. And oh yeah, I don't want to have to walk up & down 41 flights of stairs for a couple of days because the elevators are out.

  8. Craig Cook says:

    If people really want to stay in their house for a long time, I'm surprised none of them would rather have lower valuation (and hence, lower property taxes). The situation is distorted in California because of Prop 13, where property value increases only add value to the owner, but don't increase local revenue.

  9. Paul says:

    You had to go to Seattle for an example? What about the ballot issue “No Wall On The Waterfront”, where NIMBY elitists in a condo built behind a tennis court (built in the shadow of the Embarcadero Freeway) wanted to stop a building replacing the courts. There IS a wall on the waterfront, made up of the odd-numbered pier facades north of the Ferry Building, but the tennis court is on the land side of the Embarcadero, behind a parking lot. The ballot measure passed. “Save Cathedral Hill” is another campaign waged by exiting condo owners, this time west of Van Ness, in an area named for 3 churches, two of which are historically significant. Mostly though these are tower dwellers in towers scattered thinly, one for every three or four blocks fighting against adding any other towers. All of them have on site parking and nobody walks in Cathedral Hill. Or, my favorite, the Telegraph Hill dwellers, SFs ultimate elitist NIMBYs, suing to stop construction of a tower (twenty stories or so) on the east end of the lot occupied by the Pyramid. A building behind the site is already at that height, and of course the Pyramid is far taller, but a Judge bought the argument that building a tower so close to the Pyramid would destroy the artistic composition of the Pyramids juxtaposition against the skyline. These folks don’t just protect their views, they think they own their view and everything in it.

  10. runn3r says:

    Nobody wants cheap apartment complexes right next to his detached single family home. Once low incomes move into these apartment complexes, people will leave the neighborhood which results in the creation of the next Compton.

  11. L.S. Palm. 1974 says:

    You are a selfish nerd. Trickle down housing is not happening. Look yimby is developers wanting safety codes cut. The zoning thing is an astroturf. You guys have trust funds and are raised by upper mid class right wingers

  12. Maniac3020 says:

    The primary factor in the long term deterioration, and eventual collapse of a civilization, is the wealthy and powerful preventing change, to protect the status quo. Lack of adaptation to changing circumstances leads to a growing weight of problems, that eventually break the camels back.

  13. Sunshine Imperials says:

    Nimby’s are a check on the power of developers, preventing overdevelopment in towns and cities, and preventing excessive population in places. Not everybody wants to live in dense and cramped city. To be fair, I also dislike how suburbanites are forcing their values on cities with different needs, where single-family homes simply are not enough.

  14. Nona Wolf says:

    Residents of Martha's Vineyard get the 2022 NIMBY award. The like to wave the immigrant flag by calling themselves a "Sanctuary City" – then promptly called the national guard to remove 50 illegals because the richest democrats in America "don't have the resources".

    Obama wanted to bring high density zoning to your suburb… but he won't have it in his.

  15. L H says:

    Cool. If they end up winning the fight many of those people lacking housing will leave. That's teachers and nurses, then doctors and other needed professions. The economy will drain away with them. Leave the zoning fanatics to their single family homes, screaming into the void while their home value plummets cause no one wants to live in an economic dead zone.

  16. Nayber says:

    There is another case for the anti urbanization mindset: demographics. People have more kids on average the more rural the area, so density shouldn't be overused. I'm not sure where this balance is, and I think the US is not too the point where we need to worry about being too dense yet, but that is a valid critique nonetheless

ใส่ความเห็น

อีเมลของคุณจะไม่แสดงให้คนอื่นเห็น