POVERTY IS A FEATURE NOT A BUG

Not explicitly, maybe, but implicitly, absolutely, and in multiple ways:

Supporting the system that creates one over the other
Having 'bootstrap' attitudes about the poor
Worrying about property value over utilization
Complaining about the homeless rather than the lack of action on housing
Voting against people who run on public housing

In so, so many ways, people say they prefer the latter over the former. Usually just with the caveat that the homeless people also be invisible.

Maybe we should institute a tax on underutilized land in metro areas.
- Land Value Tax 👀
- I think a simple law that if there is a building, it must be in a repaired state.
  In St. Louis a person opened large portions of the city where they’ve let the holes decay.
  He should have to keep them in a proper upkeep or tear them down.
  
  Fuck anyone that uses money to buy things and let them rot. That's a purposefully broad statement.
  
  I agree. I wish I could find an article on this guy but he is just hoarding and letting it rot. Has something to do with taxes.
- Based Geoism.
I wonder who is doing this voting? Oh, it's people who live in the areas we can't afford to live in. And capitalists add lobbying power to those voters selfish interests.

In the United States at least, your local government's public hearings for new housing developments kinda begs to differ.

People will demand the homeless be eliminated from their area while simultaneously opposing development of housing or shelters for the homeless in their area.

So maybe you're right though: they don't hate the apartments more, they simply can't make up their mind on which they hate more.

I agree but want to say everyone jumps to homeless. There are a ton of normal people that are suffering from high rent, lack of options, etc. We need to think about way more than homeless.
So it sounds like zoning laws are the problem?
- In some cases. But even proposed changes to zoning laws can get this kind of opposition.
  
  Aside from zoning laws, there's the lack of a unified federal intervention. This prevents any one area from addressing the local homeless issue because any area that takes steps to address it will consequently absorb more homeless individuals from other places in the country. For example, if a city in California develops a program to house any homeless individuals, then homeless individuals from other cities and states will be more likely to go to said city to get housed. Even worse, there are states that would actually pay for their transportation. What would happen is that either the city would have to solve a much larger homeless problem as new homeless move into town, or the initial wave of homeless people will be house while the new arrivals and homeless will stay homeless, leaving a continued homeless problem.
  
  Succinctly put.
  
  So conservative NIMBYs are the problem?
  
  There's definitely an "I got mine, fuck you." component, yes.
I think it’s more so that people don’t want an apartment complex built in their backyard, not that they are opposed to them being built in an area where there is proper infrastructure
- NIMBY!!
  Where do you place the proper infrastructure then? It’s always going to be in someone’s “back yard” as you put it.
  
  Well there’s considerable difference between an apartment complex in a suburb not designed for heavy traffic and less developed areas where there’s room for expansion for infrastructure.
  We can’t expand roads in my area, either for an extra lane (which I know is a sin) or for buses because it would be right up on houses at that point.
  However, just a few miles down the road on the main drag, there’s undeveloped land that would be perfect. Build it there.
  When I say “backyard” I mean literally in your backyard. Instead of name calling and downvoting, have a fucking conversation and ask in a respectful manner what somebody means. Stop being a douche because you automatically assume somebody who thinks slightly differently than you is wrong.
  
  Well articulated. I'm not from the US, but I've seen housing developments go sideways when they built four 10-story blocks (not in somebody's back yard, but in an area without proper infrastructure) and after 1000ish people had moved in there were 1 hour long queues just to get out of the complex because there was only one road with one lane per direction. And the only bus stop was not really reliable.
  This was not built in the middle of the city because of land availability (and huge prices even if there was land available - you're near the metro and tram and a bus stop? pay 50% more. oh, you're near a park too? pay 50% more on top of that). Should we just tear down old buildings in low density areas in the city to make room for big blocks? Some might be worth tearing down because of age and overall condition, but good luck getting people to move out.
  
  lmao make up your mind
  do you want to have a conversation without name calling? Then leave out the name calling or kindly get fucked
  
  Yeah, "in stead of name calling, stop being a douche" is not the MOST consistent argument ever 😂
  
  Tired of being nice. I do it all the time and it’s never returned in kind.
  Lemmy users act like this is a different place, that it’s a more wholesome internet, what a joke. It’s as bad as anywhere else.
  
  I wasn’t being mean spirited with my original comment, it was a legitimate question. Whenever I hear people say something like “I don’t want that!” I like to find out why. It’s just curiosity. Sorry if it came across mean.

It's not far off what many think. Many think apartments are, oh so many adjectives, dirty, poor, unsanitary, inhumane, cruel, unusual, etc.

Who is “many”? Do you have surveys and data to support this?
- Go to/watch any planning or proposal meeting and watch the pearl clutching and nimbyism. I think you know this but you want to demand "studies" instead of engaging in good faith.
  
  you want to demand "studies" instead of engaging in good faith.
  Said the ocean gate sub captain.
  
  jiggles keys Who wants to go see a shipwreck??

Sure they do. Look at all of the posts from my neighbors on Facebook and Nextdoor every time a developer tries to build an apartment building instead of a single family home in our neighborhood.

We're not building homes, we're not focussing on density. But apparently our elected officials have no problem letting people set up shanty towns. Where do you think the priorities lay?

What do you mean we’re not building homes? I have plenty of homes and apartments being built in my city that cater to lots of strata of incomes.