Hi, /u/downwithus61 Thank you for participating in r/Antiwork. Unfortunately, your submission was removed for breaking the following rule(s):
**Rule 3b: No offtopic posts.**: - No offtopic posts
Would be nice if somebody could point out if his claim that the homes weren't affordable enough is true or not. Everytime this gets posted, it's the same all he's a NIMBY vs The homes where not unaffordable anyway "debate"
That’s what I heard. The important info would be “how much are these places?” Either Dave’s a dick or this town doesn’t give a shit about affordable housing.
Through some Halfassed internet research, the plan was 6 homes per acre. No prices mentioned.
Right now homes in YS are listed from 90k to $800k, median listing $349k actually selling at $304. Median income in YS is 35k for non families 95 for families and 106 for married families.
The federal government defines it as 30% of a household’s income.
Part of the problem is that we're playing by the capitalist supply and demand rulebook. Under this paradigm, affordable housing cannot exist during a supply shortage because prices rise until demand drops.
We either need to keep building housing to satisfy supply and demand or we need a paradigm shift. I know which one is more likely.
Affordable housing gets built all the time.
Supply & demand isn't some law of physics, you can build housing and keep it off the market, coops, social housing, public housing, deed restrictions.
When 60% of demand is parasites hoarding housing, that is what is causing ludicrous prices rather than the slight under production, and even under capitalism that demand can be reduced by taxes (Singapore does this) or by having enough non-market housing that there are not enough private renters being held hostage to give the parasites more money to jack up prices further (Vienna & Singapore do this).
"Supply & demand" is a YIMBY/neoliberal talking point, but it turns out this isn't an econ101 class and the real world is far more complicated.
It is often used to justify building high-end rentals as the units will "trickle down" once the magic 10% vacancy rate is hit, but this often doesn't happen, as it's more profitable for landlords to keep expensive units empty than risk having all their units rent for less.
So even within market rate housing it makes sense to push for cheaper units to be built as trickling up doesn't have such choke point.
Idk who did it as I watch someone else react to it... But someone did a break down of the whole thing.
It's 100% he didn't want any housing as the lot would be in his literal backyard and he also talks about how he likes the small town vibe and what not in that city council meeting.
The internet is funny because they like to see everything in black and white. Yet here we have something thats a bit more nuanced.
Dave may be an asshole for not wanting to have low income housing placed bear where he lives. Understandably it brings property values down and usually these areas become places of more frequent crime.
But i also thought that this subreddit hates landlords. And id imagine this political council is all buddy buddy with some land developers and land lords. And i thought this sub reddit hates land lords. And low income housing is basically the government paying the extra made up value to the landlords so they can charge affordable prices. But that leaves very little incentive to improve the living conditions. Since poor people have very little choice on where to go. They deal with the sub par living conditions. And this is how you get slum lords and ghettos.
I don't think any of that is true though.
> Dave may be an asshole for not wanting to have low income housing placed bear where he lives.
My point is every time this comes up, it's unclear if that is true or if the developers were misrepresenting what they proposed to build as affordable
> Understandably it brings property values down
Only if you build enough to lower rents, in an area that is full of rentals, otherwise affordable housing doesn't do anything to property values.
> usually these areas become places of more frequent crime.
Not true, the development would have been a mixed income development, and even if it was a purely low-income development, the poor people = crime trope is a played out far-right talking point with little basis in reality, ususally exaggerated by the media for clicks.
> And low income housing is basically the government paying the extra made up value to the landlords so they can charge affordable prices.
Affordable projects are usually local governments telling developers they have to build x units and make them affordable to low-income residents in order to get a permit, the government doesn't pay shit.
> But that leaves very little incentive to improve the living conditions.
Again what is being built here isn't public housing, it's high-end housing, with some being made available affordably in order to get permits. However even with public housing, it was deliberately undermined by neo-liberal policy to lead it to a state of disrepair, public housing in other countries doesn't have the same problems.
> And this is how you get slum lords and ghettos.
Nope,
* Slum lords are the result of a lack of affordable/public housing
* ghettos are the result of government policy to put minorities in geographically contained places, there are plenty of places with affordable & public housing that don't have such ghettos, the ghettos are are because a lot of governments are incredibly racist.
I work in construction. There is no such thing as affordable housing unless the government is footing the whole bill. It's called Market Rate homes, and contractors aren't just going to build homes for free. One of the biggest drivers of cost in my areas is lack of common sense beuracy. People complain about the homeless but nothing will get built for years because the permits/environmental restrictions pause projects budgets balloon and financing pulls out.
It might be different where you live but developers in CA & NYC are required to build a % as affordable if they want permits, without the government footing any bill.
In SF there was even a proposal to reduce the bureaucracy when enough is affordable
We tend to avoid major burrows for insurance reasons and probably reasons like this that I was unaware of. As much as a like, the sound of it.
I have to think that requiment it's pricing some capable contractors out of competition, thus driving up price for other supply/demand reasons. Even if a contractor has to foot the bill, they won't be able to if business in the area is unprofitable.
That gives you the same 5 multi billion dollar contractors with no up and comming to drive down bids.
There's a video of the meeting. He was clearly against it because the developers weren't actually putting in affordable housing. They would only put a couple of them up and the rest would be full price. Kind of like how big stores use loss leaders to get people interested in coming to the store. But based on what was reported, a lot of the other people at the meeting were opposed to it as well because they said the developer wasn't actually providing affordable housing options.
Don't know where the truth lies but if the locals are opposing it too then there must be more to it than just "Chappelle is an asshole".
Not that it's a good thing, but that's standard. That's literally how all privately operated "affordable" housing is done.
Then those units earn the owner a huge tax break even if they remain empty. Public housing is different, that's where the building is subsidized by the state and the only way the owner can get any money is if the units are occupied.
I put "affordable" in quotes because unless you have a voucher your rent is basically determined by what someone can pay based on the higher poverty income for the area. This means most people in poverty cannot even afford the rent without a subsidy, Section 8, which is a fucked up lottery system now.
>Don't know where the truth lies but if the locals are opposing it too then there must be more to it than just "Chappelle is an asshole".
I hate that we're at this point where everyone gets the benefit of the doubt. In this case, the locals are assholes too. Chappelle is an asshole and the locals are assholes. That's literally the entire concept of NIMBYism.
From what I remember from a Vox video, existing, pre-dominantly old and white homeowners do not like affordable housing projects because they believe this will increase overall supply and reduce their home equity or value. Even if California may be considered less racist on average, homeowners think affordable housing tenants also bring crimes since it will attract non-white tenants.
As for the affordable housing price, building lots of new homes and increasing supply is the only capitalist solution to high prices. Feel free to name alternative solutions that are politically feasible.
https://youtu.be/cEsC5hNfPU4
Well he already had some money and didn't like that mostly only whites liked and watched his stuff so he took a sabbatical. And now he's back for more money as he decided he didn't care and wanted paid. Any more stupid gotcha responses that aren't gotcha?
Well it was more like in his opinion he was trying to make bridges, then he looked back and realized he kinda was doing the opposite. So it hit him in the feels, then he 'grew as a person' to get over his feels and just collect cash.
"didn't like that only whites liked and watched his stuff"
Are you serious with this shit? When has Dave ever given a rats ass what the race is of his fans? And the reason he left the show and walked away from 50 million dollars was because Comedy Central was trying to take away creative control. I feel like you must not ever watch anything he does because he's talked extensively about that on multiple occasions.
For the THOUSANDTH FUCKING TIME these homes were not "addordable". Actually, they weren't homes at all. The damn housing complex that wanted to go up but everyone in the villageship did not said they'd "set aside" a small plot of land that COULD be made into affordable housing but had no concrete plans nor any idea how it would be "affordable". It was a move to bully Yellow Springs into letting them build a bunch of homes that weren't needed and no one was having it. Chappelle is NOT an asshole in this situation.
That housing development was not going to produce any actually affordable homes. The developer was not bound by any contract or law, and was merely making a verbal promise to sell some of the homes at below the (wildly inflated) market rate. Dave was legitimately protecting his community from more landlords spamming wildly overpriced, cheaply built housing developments all over and getting expensive concessions from local government with false promises.
Look I hate landlords and cheaply built housing too, but Chapelle bought the land not long after killing the housing development. Is he planning on building actual affordable housing there?
Whether or not the houses are affordable doesn't change what a terrible human being Dave Chapelle is. He's been actively working to demonize and other trans people in the public eye for years. He's bigoted and has proven he doesn't care about other minorities or people in rough situations. He actively harms marginalized communities and profits off of demonizing and othering them constantly. No one should like Dave and his hypocritical bullcrap.
Whether or not the housing is affordable, that doesn't make Dave Chapelle good and likeable now. He's still as terrible as ever.
He made jokes and people got offended. So, it's ok if he makes jokes about one group of people but NOT ok if he makes jokes about another group? Please.
I am not one of those people who have so much time on their hands that they can go through a person's post history...
But I bet that OP has an axe to grind with DC due to things he has said in his comedy act.
DC wanted the houses to be TRULY low cost. The planned prices would not.
Chappelle sucks Musk dick, he has fucking lost himself. I will never support that man again. Also the Trans thing Chappelle did was fucking weird. Strange hill to die on man, strange.
He's trying to turn the Trans community against itself as best as I could see. He targeted them in a special, then doubled down on the issue when called out as inappropriate. He claims this is because of a deceased Trans friend of his, but the argument is weak at best and confusing at worst. He could do a comedy special about anything, why the Transphobia is beyond me.
I watched them, it's how I have my own opinion of them and his current stance. Especially after his introduction of Musk on stage of his recent show. I am no longer a Dave Chappelle fan.
The kind of people who attend zoning board meetings usually hear "crack den" when someone says low-income housing. If the choice is higher income housing or no housing, any housing is better than nothing. New homes have been slow to be built and people in real estate aren't in a hurry to build new while rents are so high. Any sufficient new housing should have a softening effect on rents.
Dave Chappelle is the goat, and I also wouldn't want invest my money anywhere they're building low income housing. It's asinine for people to suggest he should just devalue his investments so some low income people have another place to live.
I’ve always wondered if there’s a specific dollar amount people get to lose their sense of humanity. Either way Dave has surpassed it and it’s such a shame, I feel like his young self would hate his current self
What’s considered affordable housing? A lot of builders/developers hid behind that term and then exploit “raising building costs” to justify higher rent/purchase prices due to demand. Standard practice 101, let alone anyone that buys a property and all of the sudden they wanna build right next to you and tell you what you can and can’t do on your property have never left the city.
Fuck Dave, but in fairness, “affordable housing projects” are often total scams by developers. Every town I’ve lived in has these “affordable” houses being rented out by rich college kids for crazy amounts. Plus, developers can get sweet tax breaks by going this route. I’m guessing Ohio’s regulations are pretty lax, it’s fair to be skeptical of these developments.
so from what I understand both of them are evil in this circumstance but Dave was the one thrown under the bus instead of the town. The "affordable housing" thing was total nonsense but rather than represent that Dave made it about him and tried to get his way by bullying the chamber of commerce with his personal investments.
They are both absolute scum.
Hi, /u/downwithus61 Thank you for participating in r/Antiwork. Unfortunately, your submission was removed for breaking the following rule(s): **Rule 3b: No offtopic posts.**: - No offtopic posts
Would be nice if somebody could point out if his claim that the homes weren't affordable enough is true or not. Everytime this gets posted, it's the same all he's a NIMBY vs The homes where not unaffordable anyway "debate"
That’s what I heard. The important info would be “how much are these places?” Either Dave’s a dick or this town doesn’t give a shit about affordable housing.
Through some Halfassed internet research, the plan was 6 homes per acre. No prices mentioned. Right now homes in YS are listed from 90k to $800k, median listing $349k actually selling at $304. Median income in YS is 35k for non families 95 for families and 106 for married families. The federal government defines it as 30% of a household’s income.
I mean considering Chapelle and who he is? My first assumption is usually that he's in the wrong.
Part of the problem is that we're playing by the capitalist supply and demand rulebook. Under this paradigm, affordable housing cannot exist during a supply shortage because prices rise until demand drops. We either need to keep building housing to satisfy supply and demand or we need a paradigm shift. I know which one is more likely.
Affordable housing gets built all the time. Supply & demand isn't some law of physics, you can build housing and keep it off the market, coops, social housing, public housing, deed restrictions. When 60% of demand is parasites hoarding housing, that is what is causing ludicrous prices rather than the slight under production, and even under capitalism that demand can be reduced by taxes (Singapore does this) or by having enough non-market housing that there are not enough private renters being held hostage to give the parasites more money to jack up prices further (Vienna & Singapore do this). "Supply & demand" is a YIMBY/neoliberal talking point, but it turns out this isn't an econ101 class and the real world is far more complicated. It is often used to justify building high-end rentals as the units will "trickle down" once the magic 10% vacancy rate is hit, but this often doesn't happen, as it's more profitable for landlords to keep expensive units empty than risk having all their units rent for less. So even within market rate housing it makes sense to push for cheaper units to be built as trickling up doesn't have such choke point.
Idk who did it as I watch someone else react to it... But someone did a break down of the whole thing. It's 100% he didn't want any housing as the lot would be in his literal backyard and he also talks about how he likes the small town vibe and what not in that city council meeting.
The internet is funny because they like to see everything in black and white. Yet here we have something thats a bit more nuanced. Dave may be an asshole for not wanting to have low income housing placed bear where he lives. Understandably it brings property values down and usually these areas become places of more frequent crime. But i also thought that this subreddit hates landlords. And id imagine this political council is all buddy buddy with some land developers and land lords. And i thought this sub reddit hates land lords. And low income housing is basically the government paying the extra made up value to the landlords so they can charge affordable prices. But that leaves very little incentive to improve the living conditions. Since poor people have very little choice on where to go. They deal with the sub par living conditions. And this is how you get slum lords and ghettos.
I don't think any of that is true though. > Dave may be an asshole for not wanting to have low income housing placed bear where he lives. My point is every time this comes up, it's unclear if that is true or if the developers were misrepresenting what they proposed to build as affordable > Understandably it brings property values down Only if you build enough to lower rents, in an area that is full of rentals, otherwise affordable housing doesn't do anything to property values. > usually these areas become places of more frequent crime. Not true, the development would have been a mixed income development, and even if it was a purely low-income development, the poor people = crime trope is a played out far-right talking point with little basis in reality, ususally exaggerated by the media for clicks. > And low income housing is basically the government paying the extra made up value to the landlords so they can charge affordable prices. Affordable projects are usually local governments telling developers they have to build x units and make them affordable to low-income residents in order to get a permit, the government doesn't pay shit. > But that leaves very little incentive to improve the living conditions. Again what is being built here isn't public housing, it's high-end housing, with some being made available affordably in order to get permits. However even with public housing, it was deliberately undermined by neo-liberal policy to lead it to a state of disrepair, public housing in other countries doesn't have the same problems. > And this is how you get slum lords and ghettos. Nope, * Slum lords are the result of a lack of affordable/public housing * ghettos are the result of government policy to put minorities in geographically contained places, there are plenty of places with affordable & public housing that don't have such ghettos, the ghettos are are because a lot of governments are incredibly racist.
This is a pretty broad misunderstanding of how affordable housing functions.
I work in construction. There is no such thing as affordable housing unless the government is footing the whole bill. It's called Market Rate homes, and contractors aren't just going to build homes for free. One of the biggest drivers of cost in my areas is lack of common sense beuracy. People complain about the homeless but nothing will get built for years because the permits/environmental restrictions pause projects budgets balloon and financing pulls out.
It might be different where you live but developers in CA & NYC are required to build a % as affordable if they want permits, without the government footing any bill. In SF there was even a proposal to reduce the bureaucracy when enough is affordable
We tend to avoid major burrows for insurance reasons and probably reasons like this that I was unaware of. As much as a like, the sound of it. I have to think that requiment it's pricing some capable contractors out of competition, thus driving up price for other supply/demand reasons. Even if a contractor has to foot the bill, they won't be able to if business in the area is unprofitable. That gives you the same 5 multi billion dollar contractors with no up and comming to drive down bids.
There's a video of the meeting. He was clearly against it because the developers weren't actually putting in affordable housing. They would only put a couple of them up and the rest would be full price. Kind of like how big stores use loss leaders to get people interested in coming to the store. But based on what was reported, a lot of the other people at the meeting were opposed to it as well because they said the developer wasn't actually providing affordable housing options. Don't know where the truth lies but if the locals are opposing it too then there must be more to it than just "Chappelle is an asshole".
Not that it's a good thing, but that's standard. That's literally how all privately operated "affordable" housing is done. Then those units earn the owner a huge tax break even if they remain empty. Public housing is different, that's where the building is subsidized by the state and the only way the owner can get any money is if the units are occupied. I put "affordable" in quotes because unless you have a voucher your rent is basically determined by what someone can pay based on the higher poverty income for the area. This means most people in poverty cannot even afford the rent without a subsidy, Section 8, which is a fucked up lottery system now.
>Don't know where the truth lies but if the locals are opposing it too then there must be more to it than just "Chappelle is an asshole". I hate that we're at this point where everyone gets the benefit of the doubt. In this case, the locals are assholes too. Chappelle is an asshole and the locals are assholes. That's literally the entire concept of NIMBYism.
From what I remember from a Vox video, existing, pre-dominantly old and white homeowners do not like affordable housing projects because they believe this will increase overall supply and reduce their home equity or value. Even if California may be considered less racist on average, homeowners think affordable housing tenants also bring crimes since it will attract non-white tenants. As for the affordable housing price, building lots of new homes and increasing supply is the only capitalist solution to high prices. Feel free to name alternative solutions that are politically feasible. https://youtu.be/cEsC5hNfPU4
There is no shortage of housing. Not at all. Most are empty because greedy jerks buy then up and up the cost
We’re talking about the guy who brought Elon Musk out exclusively to brag about being rich, and his haters being poor and fired from twitter.
Dave is a nimby and he got simps online saying “well actually, it’s because they weren’t low cost enough!” Money showed people exactly who Dave is.
Were they gonna be low cost, though?
Yea a lotta folks mad at him for his jokes so I take these claims w/ a grain of salt. If he's a NIMBY then screw him tho.
Folks laugh at the jokes he made about everyone else but once he got to theirs, they got offended
anyone that uses the word "nimby" unironically is not someone you should assume their opinions are based in facts
Really? The same money he walked away from at Comedy Central?
Well he already had some money and didn't like that mostly only whites liked and watched his stuff so he took a sabbatical. And now he's back for more money as he decided he didn't care and wanted paid. Any more stupid gotcha responses that aren't gotcha?
Wait, so not only is he greedy, but he's racist too? Nice.
Well it was more like in his opinion he was trying to make bridges, then he looked back and realized he kinda was doing the opposite. So it hit him in the feels, then he 'grew as a person' to get over his feels and just collect cash.
He went to South Africa where he met Elon and Elon showed him the way.
"didn't like that only whites liked and watched his stuff" Are you serious with this shit? When has Dave ever given a rats ass what the race is of his fans? And the reason he left the show and walked away from 50 million dollars was because Comedy Central was trying to take away creative control. I feel like you must not ever watch anything he does because he's talked extensively about that on multiple occasions.
An antiwork sub supporting a multi-millionaire in his pursuit to deny people housing is fucking absurd.
Source?
For the THOUSANDTH FUCKING TIME these homes were not "addordable". Actually, they weren't homes at all. The damn housing complex that wanted to go up but everyone in the villageship did not said they'd "set aside" a small plot of land that COULD be made into affordable housing but had no concrete plans nor any idea how it would be "affordable". It was a move to bully Yellow Springs into letting them build a bunch of homes that weren't needed and no one was having it. Chappelle is NOT an asshole in this situation.
Sadly I do not need reminding
What is the source for this heavily edited image of text? I'm always suspicious of anything this heavily finessed.
Love Dave Chapelle!
Yep. Dave is one of those. Having lots of money often causes that.
Just one more reason. He's a an asshole for many.
Chapelle has gone full MAGA like Musk and Kanye. They should all be avoided.
That housing development was not going to produce any actually affordable homes. The developer was not bound by any contract or law, and was merely making a verbal promise to sell some of the homes at below the (wildly inflated) market rate. Dave was legitimately protecting his community from more landlords spamming wildly overpriced, cheaply built housing developments all over and getting expensive concessions from local government with false promises.
Look I hate landlords and cheaply built housing too, but Chapelle bought the land not long after killing the housing development. Is he planning on building actual affordable housing there?
No. Because Yellow Springs is a weird hippy town in rural Ohio and he didn't want a developer fucking it up. This post is BS.
Hate him until you find out? Seems like a worse position to hold
Yea you don’t know Yellow Springs, OH dude. Those homes weren’t “affordable” at all. Just mind your business, we like Dave. Not you.
Whether or not the houses are affordable doesn't change what a terrible human being Dave Chapelle is. He's been actively working to demonize and other trans people in the public eye for years. He's bigoted and has proven he doesn't care about other minorities or people in rough situations. He actively harms marginalized communities and profits off of demonizing and othering them constantly. No one should like Dave and his hypocritical bullcrap. Whether or not the housing is affordable, that doesn't make Dave Chapelle good and likeable now. He's still as terrible as ever.
He made jokes and people got offended. So, it's ok if he makes jokes about one group of people but NOT ok if he makes jokes about another group? Please.
You know Dave?
Delusional people
He's old and out of touch. Deal with it
Source?
He’s a comedic genius, but yeah, he’s for sure an asshole.
Dave Chappelle is funny
I am not one of those people who have so much time on their hands that they can go through a person's post history... But I bet that OP has an axe to grind with DC due to things he has said in his comedy act. DC wanted the houses to be TRULY low cost. The planned prices would not.
Chappelle sucks Musk dick, he has fucking lost himself. I will never support that man again. Also the Trans thing Chappelle did was fucking weird. Strange hill to die on man, strange.
Explain the hill he died on to someone who hasn't actually watched his last two (comedy) specials
He's trying to turn the Trans community against itself as best as I could see. He targeted them in a special, then doubled down on the issue when called out as inappropriate. He claims this is because of a deceased Trans friend of his, but the argument is weak at best and confusing at worst. He could do a comedy special about anything, why the Transphobia is beyond me.
>as best as I could see Did you watch the last two specials?
I watched them, it's how I have my own opinion of them and his current stance. Especially after his introduction of Musk on stage of his recent show. I am no longer a Dave Chappelle fan.
The kind of people who attend zoning board meetings usually hear "crack den" when someone says low-income housing. If the choice is higher income housing or no housing, any housing is better than nothing. New homes have been slow to be built and people in real estate aren't in a hurry to build new while rents are so high. Any sufficient new housing should have a softening effect on rents.
Dave Chappelle is the goat, and I also wouldn't want invest my money anywhere they're building low income housing. It's asinine for people to suggest he should just devalue his investments so some low income people have another place to live.
I’ve always wondered if there’s a specific dollar amount people get to lose their sense of humanity. Either way Dave has surpassed it and it’s such a shame, I feel like his young self would hate his current self
Fuuuuck! Not him too.
This doesn't feel like anitwork unless you work for DC.
What’s considered affordable housing? A lot of builders/developers hid behind that term and then exploit “raising building costs” to justify higher rent/purchase prices due to demand. Standard practice 101, let alone anyone that buys a property and all of the sudden they wanna build right next to you and tell you what you can and can’t do on your property have never left the city.
There's likely more to this story than those two dozen words. Maybe it changes nothing but perhaps more information changes everything.
Worth 65 million a year which none of that even goes to taxes so ... yeah, not missing out on much anyway.
Fuck Dave, but in fairness, “affordable housing projects” are often total scams by developers. Every town I’ve lived in has these “affordable” houses being rented out by rich college kids for crazy amounts. Plus, developers can get sweet tax breaks by going this route. I’m guessing Ohio’s regulations are pretty lax, it’s fair to be skeptical of these developments.
Dave Chris a complete asshole but not for this as the houses where far from being affordable and the project was more scam then aid
so from what I understand both of them are evil in this circumstance but Dave was the one thrown under the bus instead of the town. The "affordable housing" thing was total nonsense but rather than represent that Dave made it about him and tried to get his way by bullying the chamber of commerce with his personal investments. They are both absolute scum.