The key is to link it to something else. Want rail service? Allow this housing. Want a road repair grant. Allow this housing. You know. Negotiate.

Or, you build an alliance against them, like how WMA was brought on board for a law requiring places with MBTA service to allow higher-density housing because it protects WMA from further encroachment.

The problem is that NIMBYs prevent developers from developing and building new housing all over the state.

Everyone thinks that their precious little neighborhood was ordained by god and that they are all entitled to never have their neighborhood ever change, and that new housing should be built somewhere else.

I think I know exactly where that is.

There aren’t many triple deckers in Brookline because classist zoning has made them illegal, but there one small street I walk down that has a whole bunch of them.

It’s weird because there’s one that has what looks like a stucco finish which looks kind of strange and out of place on an otherwise typical triple decker.

>They’re free now, so apparently it worked.

They didn't do that. Sympathetic White Northerners and the 101st Airbourne did. If you don't have the force to back up your proclamations, they don't matter.

>But at least you understand what side of history you NIMBYs stand on.

History is not a narrative or a grand march to a leftist utopia. It doesnt end. There are no "sides of history". If Hitler stayed out of France and we'd be singing the praises of the Nazis for standing up to the genocidal Soviets.

Are any of these women getting in contact with their local Council on Aging? There is also a housing authority in most if not all towns that can get people into income based apartments.

I frankly found the article to be pedestrian with little information as to why these women are living outside, not in a shelter, or otherwise engaged with housing support.

Since these women are fully functioning adults, should they not be able to get into a homeless diversion program until permanent housing can be found.

The article said they wont move but could someone please explain this to me? If your living in your car why would you not just drive an hour south or west and find a cheaper place in CT RI or western MA? You can always drive back to eastern MA to see your old community and still have a place to sleep thats a bit further out.

Well done! Hard for me to imagine being able to do this myself. I’m impressed.

> So did black Southerners. How’d that go?

They’re free now, so apparently it worked. But at least you understand what side of history you NIMBYs stand on.

> If enough people hate you, you will lose. It’s better to negotiate an acceptable settlement if you don’t have the power to use force.

Lol. You greatly overestimate the number of people willing to commit violence against someone else over an apartment building. Even if they were willing, it’s better to die free than live on your knees.

MBTA link. Search for "Trip Planner"

Almost every rink has public skate hours..

So did black Southerners. How'd that go?

If enough people hate you, you will lose. It's better to negotiate an acceptable settlement if you don't have the power to use force

So be it. I reserve the right to shoot terrorists that seek to do serious harm to my family and/or property.

In fact, you will have the opposite because it's not occasional, it happens all the time.

> It keeps people from shooting up/bombing/bulldozering a building or city.

Better to have freedom than peace. I’d rather have property rights, affordable market-rate housing, and the occasional NIMBY terrorist than the status quo.

>brings up the killdozer

You’re just making a case for the 2nd amendment covering RPG launchers.

Do they not have Google maps in new Jersey?

FMC ice sports manages most of the municipal rinks in Massachusetts. There are a lot, you shouldn’t have a problem

https://fmcicesports.com

Red line from south station to park street n park street to north station

>Why should a neighbor have a voice over property they don’t own? If you don’t want more housing within a mile of you, buy up all the property within a mile of you, but don’t tell other people what they can or can’t build on THEIR property.

It keeps people from shooting up/bombing/bulldozering a building or city.

>Also, I’d love to see a NIMBY blow themselves up trying to rig an improvised explosive together. That’d be hilarious.

Here you go

Why should a neighbor have a voice over property they don’t own? If you don’t want more housing within a mile of you, buy up all the property within a mile of you, but don’t tell other people what they can or can’t build on THEIR property.

Also, I’d love to see a NIMBY blow themselves up trying to rig an improvised explosive together. That’d be hilarious.

Not allowing people to have a voice is how you get domestic terrorism, something Massachusetts is very comfortable with.

If we just allowed developers to develop, we wouldn’t have this problem.

No, I don't. That's why I try to pay attention to what they're doing and vote accordingly. I would hope that everyone else does the same, rather than voting down all expenses and hoping that the politicians do good things with the money I've saved them in the short term.

Or fireworks

Housing is pricy

"keep snakes that I’ve rescued, should I release them into the New England winter?"

Right here is here is where you are showing a lack of understanding.

But sure! I'll read your paper.