He blocked me on the old place because I argued he was misusing the term “peer reviewed” in reference to his famous non-Anglicized names study.
He blocked me on the old place because I argued he was misusing the term “peer reviewed” in reference to his famous non-Anglicized names study.
I can’t believe *that* was his methodology as if Vancouver has no second, third, fourth, fifth generation Chinese-Canadian citizens.
If it had actually been academically peer reviewed the reviewers may have had some questions. But he just had some of his “peers” read it.
Given the quality of your work, I'd see this as further evidence that you are doing your job.
Yesh, it’s weird that people aren’t willing to tolerate even the possibility of engaging into discussions on housing. But this does help explain the fragmented nature of the housing discourse.
He’s also got Frances Bula blocked. You’re not missing much, Yan is an intellectually dishonest NIMBY whose job is promoting his night school. (btw his night school is so bad I got a refund the one time I attended a class)
After a decade+ in Vancouver housing politics there are very few people I respect less than Andy Yan. He will comment on anything to get in the news, and never has anything constructive or positive to say; it's always "actually this is problematic because X." Even opposes social housing proposals
He is one of the most intellectually dishonest people I have encountered in this space. When BC was introducing provincial housing legislation he complained back-to-back about how 1) this might cause redevelopment in low-income neighbourhoods 2) BC's richest cities were required to build more
To push back a little bit on 1), there is a risk of displacing people who currently have affordable rental housing by replacing those affordable rental units with newer less affordable ones. It’s a valid concern that new housing doesn’t displace vulnerable tenants.
If you have that concern you should not be mad that *West Van and Oak Bay* are specifically being targeted for more housing!
Haha ya that’s fair
Sure, but that's a problem to manage, not an excuse to choke off all new supply and turn Metro Vancouver into a luxurious prison for the status quo.
O
I don’t disagree, we need more supply, I just called it a valid concern. If you look at rezoning applications in Van, most new towers are set to replace existing 3-4 storey apartments, which are currently some of the most affordable rental units in the city. They’re not building towers in point grey
Probably for the best
As I recall, he worked with David Eby to quantify "foreign real estate investment" in Vancouver by going through the equivalent of the phone book and counting property owners with "Asian names."
Yup.
You've made me wonder what happened to that other guy who tried to ride the blame-the-Chinese-names wave to fame. The young 'progressive' who insisted speculation was *the* problem... unless it was done by (implicitly white) Canadians. What was his name again?
I'm not sure! Although that is a common theme, "RE investment for me, but not for thee." The inherent contradictions in the discourse makes me wonder if "public consultations" are actually pragmatic exercises, unless, pragmatically speaking, the goal is to never build housing.
What kind of "professor" blocks anyone who may scrutinize him and his ideas. Oh, wait... he's from SFU, where the school's motto is "Agree with me or SFU". Makes sense now. 🤣