To the Editor:

Paul Hogarth's column advocating opposition to more high-rises in South of Market made two fundamental false assumptions that the vast majority of people make: "Of course, growth is inevitable - and the answer is not to bring all market-rate housing to a screeching halt." Both of these claims are completely false.

First, growth is not only not inevitable, in the modern world of birth control and abortion options, it is a conscious choice. Only cancer cells have infinite growth as an M.O., growing until they consume their host and then die themselves. Constant growth will have the same effect on the human race; we will continue to consume the planet until we make it unlivable for even ourselves. While urban infill is clearly a much better option than further destroying natural land by building on open space, trying to fix overpopulation and constant population growth by refusing to directly confront those problems and instead using false solutions like urban infill will only temporarily mitigate their harms, not solve the problems. For example, urban infill can only go so far before it turns an urban area into a wasteland, an ecological sacrifice zone. The more people who are crammed into an area, the more pollution will be created and the more waste that will be needed to be disposed of, until those things, in addition to others, become untenable. The attitude we need is that there are already far too many people everywhere and that we need to greatly reduce human population through proper family planning, not that we can just cram people into cities and all will be well.

Second, why in the world would any progressive NOT want to ban all market rate housing indefinitely? Market rate housing in San Francisco just brings in more rich people, thereby driving up real estate values and driving out the people who define this City: artists, musicians, poets, radicals, and other non-conformists. It does nothing to provide housing for these people or for others who need it. Furthermore, these rich people are more conservative than average San Franciscans, and have been a big part of the "end of fun" in the City, as the Bay Guardian put it. They are also more conservative politically and, if their numbers are allowed to continue to increase, will eventually lead to a conservative Board of Supervisors, even with district elections.

As progressives and radicals, we should not accept status quo solutions or assumptions without severe scrutiny. Overpopulation and constant population growth is not inevitable and need to be directly addressed. And market rate housing should be stopped until and unless all those who need affordable housing are taken care of and the non-conformists in this city all have a place to live.

Jeff Hoffman
San Francisco



To the Editor:

Of all the shockers in this astonishing campaign, most unbelievable is the Clintons' trainwreck with Afro-African voters. And that Bill Clinton's own incompetent, race-insensitive gaffes would compound the wreckage. Or that Bill would finally blame Obama for playing the race card!

Hillary and Bill are managing to lose 90% of the most loyal Democratic voting block -- despite countless blacks starting as big Obama skeptics, assuming race would do him in. The Miracle of '08 so far: race didn't and hasn't trumped Obama. I take heart the media-revved farce starring Rev. Wright -- feeding so many fears and stereotypes -- has not truly injured Obama, whose daily Gallup poll lead among Democrats today is 12 pts, 50-38, well up from last week.

Obviously, enough white voters -- taken in for years on the war, terrorism, taxes, and torture -- have become more color-blind, endorsing Obama's unique, genetic rainbow, his candidacy or positions. That the focus moved from race in one week to how Obama talks to regular (white, working class) folks relishing beer and bowling is a remarkable turnabout.

I am speechless -- and bemused -- at the wealthy, ruling class Clintons fabricating their image as just folks while castigating the much poorer, minority Obama as an out-of-touch elitist. A privileged president vs. a modest community organizer from the southside of Chicago, the ultimate working class town?

Let us give thanks for the Miracle of Obama so far: he's the favorite to win the nomination and, with John McCain self-destructing weekly, we will have our first, not wholly white president not owned by the Washington establishments, and with an African name.

That marvel would help rewrite the racial realities you address. Who would have guessed six months ago? Certainly not Hillary Clinton, transformed from the well-funded, well-heeled, virtual shoo-in to a caricature of the desperate, pandering politician ready to wipe out gas taxes or auction off the White House if it meant her winning.

We will learn more about Obama but what stands out is what we've learned about the Clintons -- for me much of it ain't pretty, nor an omen for better politics.

Robert Becker
Mendocino CA



To the Editor:

Criticizing Joe Nation for AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, what was arguably one of the first global warming initiatives on a state level, is ludicrous.

And anyone who lives in the Marin or Sonoma County is well-aware of the work being done on Highway 101, including adding lanes.

Joe also believes, unlike Mark Leno, that Indian casinos can be addressed at the state level, and he intends to do so.

I can tell you that from a Sonoma County perspective, one of the best things Joe Nation has going for him is that he's from the North Bay. I for one am tired of San Francisco politicians, who make sure that SF is taken care of, while all we get up here is the fuzzy side of the lollipop.

Pete Jackson
Santa Rosa, CA



You can submit letters to the editor by clicking on this link: feedback@beyondchron.org or by writing to:

Beyond Chron
126 Hyde Street
San Francisco, CA 94102
415-771-9850 (phone)