Bravo, Concord! Well Done!

1 Like

Only a matter of time, grasshopper.

We take victories, big or small, as they come, Sire…

Seems that rent control is mostly supported by Latinos.

Concord is 63% white, 32% Latino. So it’s not surprising that Concord is having the rent control talk.

I guess some day if all the concilmembers become Latinos, rent control will easily pass.

But Concord has 60% homeownership, maybe the voters can shoot down any rent control measure even if the council passes.

The more skin in the game obviously helps the cause against rent control. Shoot, I WISH all those freaking new condos in SF would sell so that we get that more people flipping sides presumably. Yes, we go back and forth on this (probably just me) but so many economists have said that rent control is bad, so one would think some higher ups (hello Supreme Court) would do something about it. If The Donald nominates another conservative judge or two down the road, I wonder if that would help?

No, it won’t.

They will kick it back to individual states citing federalism and you know what CA will do. :smiling_imp:

Up to now, has The Donald really nominated anyone bad? I hear Uber and Lyft are praising the Elaine Chao nomination as we speak.

Califonia’s Latino majority will get worse. Non-Latinos need to unite and defeat all the rent control measures. Seems that Latinos are super active in politics and there is hearsay that Latinos is already controlling the state assembly.

When minorities vote based on race, it’s not a big deal. But when the majority Latino votes based on race, many unimaginable things could happen.

I get it, it’s a tough fight when you are in the minority and perceived by everyone to have deep pockets just because your name appears on some deed. Where are the concepts of neutrality and fairness when it comes to a law like rent control?

What do you mean by that? And how can you ever justify that statement?

i·den·ti·ty pol·i·tics
a tendency for people of a particular religion, race, social background, etc., to form exclusive political alliances, moving away from traditional broad-based party politics.

Identity politics, also called identitarian politics,[1] refers to political positions based on the interests and perspectives of social groups with which people identify. Identity politics includes the ways in which people’s politics may be shaped by aspects of their identity through loosely correlated social organizations. Examples include social organizations based on race, gender identity, ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, disability, religion, culture, language and dialect. Not all members of any given group are involved in identity politics.

The term identity politics came into being during the latter part of the 20th century, during the Civil Rights Era.[2] During this time period, identity politics was used by a minority group to form a coalition with members of the majority. Now the term is popularly used when referring to nationalist movements.