> Point is, if you ban anything that makes noise you’ll be left with nothing, it’s pure selfish nimbyism
The US is large enough country and it should be possible to build DC far away from homes. That’s a rare case where I support NIMBY. I lived in 1km from a gas fired power station and did bot notice any noise at all. If a DC can be heard it is either too close or too loud.
It's kind of darkly funny that NIMBY ever came to refer to housing in the first place. The term was originally meant to apply to stuff exactly like this -- i.e. genuinely noxious uses that most people nevertheless agree are necessary somewhere. Almost everybody is a NIMBY in this sense.
Incumbent homeowners (and sometimes renters in rent-control situations) voting for policies that prevent new housing from being built near them is a huge reason why housing costs so much where I live; and reducing local housing costs is probably the single biggest way that policy changes could directly improve my quality of life.
Also, housing itself is often a genuinely noxious use of land for incumbent homeowners. In part because construction creates noise and dust and requires upgrading other local physical infrastructure - but also because more housing implies more new people living in an existing neighborhood, and additional people living somewhere can themselves cause problems for the incumbent residents.
Some thing which get described as NIMBYism are better described as NIBYism.
A state housing complex is just housing. Not wanting that nearby is NIMBYism because it's about not wanting it specifically near your home even though it's, by definition, going to need to be done in a spot zoned for homes.
The question around a e.g. jet engine test site is very different though - more like "why would we need the jet engine test site to be within a mile of anyone's back yard in the first place"? Usually the answer is "we don't, it just kinda happened that way as the city grew".
There's no reason to torture the acronym just to avoid a perceived stigma. Not wanting something developed near you is NIMBYism. NIMBYism can be reasonable or unreasonable. You can label an opinion NIMBY as an implied insult or with no judgement at all.
It's less about associated stigmas and more about the usage of NIMBY becoming so generic as to lose value. I also doubt the removal of a single letter does much to fool people into forgetting about the stigmas anyways.
Not wanting a data center next to your home is now "pure selfish NIMBYism". This is how sick we are becoming. It's hideous that this is now how we treat people with homes in the US. Everything must get worse, and worse, and worse, and if you cry out against any single thing, you must be a selfish asshole.
It makes me want to fucking cry, what's happening to my country.
> It makes me want to fucking cry, what's happening to my country.
Same. We used to be a country that could get things done. Stuff like power generation and transmission lines were built out well ahead of expected demand, with resiliency baked in. Negative impacts were there, but understood as part of the whole living in society thing. Reasonable minds came together and made the best choices possible at scale and mitigated negative externalities to individuals as much as possible. We understood spending a decade on impact studies and lawsuits helped no one.
We decided to protect the absurd, so we shall get the absurd as workarounds. Folks (collectively speaking) didn't want transmission lines running through their farmland or whatnot, so now we get absurd workarounds like standing up gas turbines in datacenter parking lots.
It's going to get a whole lot worse before it gets better, since this has become the only way to get anything done.
Sorry, NIMBYism is on the way out. We are building high density housing, cafes, restaurants, shops, data centers, and offices all next to each other. Nothing you can do about it.
I used to live near a busy street. I eventually got used to the noise but when I bought my house I made sure to find a quiet spot. Now, its dead quiet at night and the difference in my quality of life is significant. I also made the city put shades on the street lights so they wouldn't shine on my house. Another huge improvement.
Peace is the dream, which is being slowly killed. People who value peace are being pushed farther and farther out. You used to be able to find peace in neighborhoods, but more and more people have to choose between community and peace.
Seems a bit harsh. Have you experienced the noise being described here first hand? How can you be sure it is the same as what you are experiencing and find acceptable?
For extra amusement, try living near a farm or a school. Public parks can also be a surprise if you don't like the sound of people playing. Add a court, and things get fun.
Public parks can also be a surprise if you don't like the sound of people playing. Add a court, and things get fun.
I once lived across the street from a public park with a court. One day the judge burned her thighs on the hot metal slide, and now it's a parking lot.
> Point is, if you ban anything that makes noise you’ll be left with nothing, it’s pure selfish nimbyism
The US is large enough country and it should be possible to build DC far away from homes. That’s a rare case where I support NIMBY. I lived in 1km from a gas fired power station and did bot notice any noise at all. If a DC can be heard it is either too close or too loud.
> That’s a rare case where I support NIMBY.
It's kind of darkly funny that NIMBY ever came to refer to housing in the first place. The term was originally meant to apply to stuff exactly like this -- i.e. genuinely noxious uses that most people nevertheless agree are necessary somewhere. Almost everybody is a NIMBY in this sense.
Incumbent homeowners (and sometimes renters in rent-control situations) voting for policies that prevent new housing from being built near them is a huge reason why housing costs so much where I live; and reducing local housing costs is probably the single biggest way that policy changes could directly improve my quality of life.
Also, housing itself is often a genuinely noxious use of land for incumbent homeowners. In part because construction creates noise and dust and requires upgrading other local physical infrastructure - but also because more housing implies more new people living in an existing neighborhood, and additional people living somewhere can themselves cause problems for the incumbent residents.
2 replies →
NIMBY is an acronym: No In My back Yard.
1 reply →
Some thing which get described as NIMBYism are better described as NIBYism.
A state housing complex is just housing. Not wanting that nearby is NIMBYism because it's about not wanting it specifically near your home even though it's, by definition, going to need to be done in a spot zoned for homes.
The question around a e.g. jet engine test site is very different though - more like "why would we need the jet engine test site to be within a mile of anyone's back yard in the first place"? Usually the answer is "we don't, it just kinda happened that way as the city grew".
There's no reason to torture the acronym just to avoid a perceived stigma. Not wanting something developed near you is NIMBYism. NIMBYism can be reasonable or unreasonable. You can label an opinion NIMBY as an implied insult or with no judgement at all.
It's less about associated stigmas and more about the usage of NIMBY becoming so generic as to lose value. I also doubt the removal of a single letter does much to fool people into forgetting about the stigmas anyways.
Not wanting a data center next to your home is now "pure selfish NIMBYism". This is how sick we are becoming. It's hideous that this is now how we treat people with homes in the US. Everything must get worse, and worse, and worse, and if you cry out against any single thing, you must be a selfish asshole.
It makes me want to fucking cry, what's happening to my country.
> It makes me want to fucking cry, what's happening to my country.
Same. We used to be a country that could get things done. Stuff like power generation and transmission lines were built out well ahead of expected demand, with resiliency baked in. Negative impacts were there, but understood as part of the whole living in society thing. Reasonable minds came together and made the best choices possible at scale and mitigated negative externalities to individuals as much as possible. We understood spending a decade on impact studies and lawsuits helped no one.
We decided to protect the absurd, so we shall get the absurd as workarounds. Folks (collectively speaking) didn't want transmission lines running through their farmland or whatnot, so now we get absurd workarounds like standing up gas turbines in datacenter parking lots.
It's going to get a whole lot worse before it gets better, since this has become the only way to get anything done.
Sorry, NIMBYism is on the way out. We are building high density housing, cafes, restaurants, shops, data centers, and offices all next to each other. Nothing you can do about it.
I used to live near a busy street. I eventually got used to the noise but when I bought my house I made sure to find a quiet spot. Now, its dead quiet at night and the difference in my quality of life is significant. I also made the city put shades on the street lights so they wouldn't shine on my house. Another huge improvement.
Peace is the dream, which is being slowly killed. People who value peace are being pushed farther and farther out. You used to be able to find peace in neighborhoods, but more and more people have to choose between community and peace.
Seems a bit harsh. Have you experienced the noise being described here first hand? How can you be sure it is the same as what you are experiencing and find acceptable?
For extra amusement, try living near a farm or a school. Public parks can also be a surprise if you don't like the sound of people playing. Add a court, and things get fun.
Public parks can also be a surprise if you don't like the sound of people playing. Add a court, and things get fun.
I once lived across the street from a public park with a court. One day the judge burned her thighs on the hot metal slide, and now it's a parking lot.
That industrial noise at night isn't required; it's just cheaper than being quieter.
The choices are not ban anything that makes noise and allow everything that makes noise.
> Also a state housing complex nearby with mentally unwell people screaming all night outside.
I think this would be the greatest annoyance to me, the other stuff becomes background noise eventually