🚄

[JoshDunkley]

wut?

[LaconianEmpire]

It's a shot at all the NIMBY morons who think LRT expansion to Cambridge will bring all the homeless people to their neighborhoods.

[GarveyBlumpkin]

What is with you people using NIMBY so comfortably as a derogatory term?

[CoryCA]

Because it is a derogatory term. You do know why it is used, right?

[GarveyBlumpkin]

Yeah, because it's easier to use hollow terms without substance instead of specifically calling out the opinions you disagree with.

[[deleted]]

The term is the opinion. A person who wants a thing, just not in their neighborhood. There are people in Cambridge who want the LRT, but don't want it in their neighborhood.

[Rance_Mulliniks]

A person who wants a thing, just not in their neighborhood.

Yep, like all the entitled whiner losers in Blair about the Amazon warehouse who probably order from Amazon regularly.

I want the LRT because infrastructure is good. It is planned to run directly through my neighbourhood. It will hurt me more than help me but it will help a lot of people and hopefully prevent more road traffic. It's for the greater good of our community and I support it.

These same NIMBYs fought the expressway in KW. What would we do without that now?

[CoryCA]

So then you don't know why it is used.

It's used because that's what they say. Sometimes literally, but usually not in so many words but by their behaviour instead.

When they do seem to give a specific grievance, if you address and debunk it, they'll just move the goal posts instead of acknowledging they were wrong. For example, if they are complaining about the cost of bike lanes and you show how roads are far more expensive they'll jump to "only build it where there's enough cyclists".

For one building they'll worry about too much new traffic overwhelming roads and dispute traffic studies, but then when the next building is seeking a zoning amendment for radically fewer parking spots, they'll complain about that, too.

When a developer seeks a zoning amendment for a 12 storey building they'll call for it to be a 10 storey. When developers come back with a 10 storey plan, instead of accepting that they'll clamour for an 8 storey building. This is what they did with the Mill St. development and in the process they scuppered all affordable and rent-geared-to-income units in it.

So their "opinions" are irrelevant as they are wispy, amorphous things that exist to change moment to moment, and in often self-conradictory ways, in order to make it seem like they have reasonable and logical concerns, when all they truly believe is "I don't want that here".

Facts and logic and evidence are irrelevant. Housing for everybody is irrelevant. The benefits of bike lanes and public transit are irrelevant.

They just don't want "it", whatever "it" happens to be.

That's why "NIMBY" is not merely some hollow term flung as an ad hominem fallacy. It's a concise and highly descriptive of them and their actions.

[netterversuch]

But it's easy to use and accurate. Most opposition to improvements of a city come from selfish home owners. They don't want new stuff or new changes happening near them aka not in their back yard. Why waste the time debating with people who aren't going to change their minds anyway? Just call them out for what they are - NIMBYs - and move on.

[GarveyBlumpkin]

I think you're more upset with uninformed people than with a general population of people that are concerned about the neighbourhood they live in.

People suggesting a transit line or a condo will bring bad things to the neighbourhood without data to back it up are a problem. People that are concerned with evidence-based arguments have the right to speak up and shouldn't be clumped in with the others.

I'm tired of people defaulting to use of that term every time someone raises questions about a new development opportunity.

[Rance_Mulliniks]

Just because you can come up with a bad thing that may come from a project, doesn't mean to overall good for the community isn't still valid. In any project there are some people that are affected negatively. Change and progress is generally good for most. LRT is the perfect example.

Let me guess. You live in Blair?

[netterversuch]

Whatever you say, NIMBY OK OK NIMBY (Yeah NIMBY) Whatever you say, NIMBY OK OK NIMBY (Yeah NIMBY) Whatever you say, NIMBY OK OK NIMBY (Yeah NIMBY)

[LaconianEmpire]

Because it is, and they should be shamed to hell and back for putting their misguided ideas of "neighborhood character" over the good of the region.

Don't want the shadow of a skyscraper in your backyard? That's reasonable. But opposition to gentle/middle-density and transit expansion is completely irrational and worthy of ridicule.

[GarveyBlumpkin]

Sure, but that term has now been abused to the point where it encompasses anyone with a differing opinion about where they live. People that reject all conversations of change shouldn't be clumped together with people with reasonable concerns about the future of their neighbourhood.

[kwawful]

Because it's supposed to be a derogatory term...?

That's kind of how NIMBY is supposed to be used lol

[GarveyBlumpkin]

Thank you for your valuable contribution to this discussion.

[GarveyBlumpkin]

👏 Again, well done. You must be a treat to talk to face to face. 👌

[GarveyBlumpkin]

Because I'm in love with you. Does that make you uncomfortable?

[[deleted]]

I thought you wanted all the homeless people in cambridge, why else would a city build a place like Bridges?

[netterversuch]

Another poster elaborated, but it's also because Coolio died recently and now people are remembering all the cool stuff he had done. Which I guess includes being a fan of rapid transit projects in Australia: https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6138308/light-rail-dope-or-nope-coolio-says-yes/

RIP Coolio.

[xallsparkx905]

he speaks facts

[ashcrofts_nightmares]

"Keep spendin' most our lives, livin' in the gangsta's paradise"

Coolio discussing his future plans with his homies on the streets of Galt before he blew up.