I would love to see a venn diagram of the homeowners who have housing is a human right type signs in their yards and those opposed to upzoning. I bet it's damn near just a circle.

I'm not opposed to upzoning. My neighborhood has been upzoned, and I'm hoping it will be my ticket out of Seattle in a few years.

My only gripe is that it will never come to the view neighborhoods, just the more moderate income neighborhoods. That's great for the homeowners (see ticket out of Seattle), but if you rent, you'll most likely not be able to afford anything, no matter how much they upzone.

As for Golf, take a trip over to Jefferson Park (or any of the public golf courses). It's not a bunch of Judge Smails. It's mostly lower-income people of color, many of whom are seniors. They pay taxes and are entitled to their recreation.

If you want to go after private golf courses knock yourself out. Also, good luck trying to shut down Broadmoor or Sand Point.

IN THIS HOUSE, WE BELIEVE:
Black Lives Matter
Housing Is a Human Right*
Love Is Love
etc. etc.

(tiny footnote at bottom)
* But You Can Have My Single-Family Zoning When You Pry It From My Cold, Dead Fingers

What are the malevolent asshole stores that are hardly not good to smash?

@5: Amazon?

Lucretia dear, the abolish golf thing has been around for awhile, and it's mostly promoted by aging hipsters (like me) who have daddy issues (which I don't)

The basic line is something like A) all of our homeless issues would be solved if we converted the golf courses to housing, B) the golf courses should be parks (which they are, but that's not important right now), or C) golf is elitist (see comment #2)

But my question to you is this: Why would the federal government care about golf courses?

Municipal golf courses are a huge waste of land - which could be more efficiently used for housing or perhaps urban agriculture - and water, not to mention further mucking up the environment with nitrate fertilizers and pesticides. The City has made some progress in the past six or seven years reducing dependence on these at public courses, but they've fallen short of the goals they set some time ago. And private courses aren't under any such restrictions. Plus, private courses such as Broadmoor and Sand Point get significant tax breaks, because the land they occupy is egregiously undervalued by the County Assessor, so essentially the tax payers are subsidizing the taxes paid for land they're not allowed to set foot on unless they're invited by a member.

I love that the ads I see here are for how older folks can improve their golf drives :) But yeah, other than public courses, private ones should be taxed at highest/best rate...i.e., housing, and let those who want to pay for it should reimburse the community via appropriate taxes.

Municipal golf courses are easily the most selfish use of land and water out of any use of public property. How many golfers can simultaneously golf on one typical 150-acre course? And what percentage of the population actually plays golf? (Private courses are just as selfish, but I accede to the private right to waste your own resources.) I eagerly await any counter-arguments.

Elon Musk planted the seeds for PayPal, Tesla and SpaceX. The Stranger only plants the seeds of discord and average Seattlites are reaping the fruit. No wonder Elon is a popular figure (and richest man in the world)n and yes you are jealin'.