[anigbrowl]

Why do the people who already live there feel so entitled to blow off a state law? It was debated, it was lobbied over, the 'build housing' constituency won the day. Now Andreesen is writing whiny letters with ALL CAPS in lieu of reasoned argument.

[sieabah]

I couldn't care less about SF or its residents. So I didn't really invest into this story. If it's a legal state law and has the backing of the state, courts, and a federal court then go ahead.

Until it is, it's just words on paper from people who feel entitled to an area they have never owned land in.

I'm not going to be empathetic with people who want to displace others who have owned homes in an area for decades just so they can be closer to the most desired location on the west coast.

[anigbrowl]

Atherton isn't in San Francisco. Nobody is being displaced. It's better to become familiar with your subject before forming an opinion.

[sieabah]

Typical HN response where you pick specifics but really ignore the crux of the issue. Thanks for perpetuating the stereotype. The _bay area_ (silicon valley), also generally known as "San Francisco". Yes we all know there is really San Jose, Oakland, SF, Palo Alto, as actual cities.

The specific geographic location is irrelevant to the discussion. I can make the same exact argument for housing in NYC or some other city. People want cheap housing where people currently live.