RVs intersect with housing issues

> > Ad hoc RV parks have burgeoned on Mountain View’s streets, accommodating residents like Whaley. But they bother some residents, who say they are irksome and should be removed. > > > > ... > > > > Even people [working regular jobs](http://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/Tech-bus-drivers-forced-to-live-in-cars-to-make-6517928.php?t=bdcf978dfb&cmpid=twitter-premium) have sometimes been forced to live in cars because they can’t afford an apartment. RVs, at least, have showers. > >

from this article

The complaints from residents are interesting.  As always they are generic NIMBY arguments dressed up in rationalized fig leaves.

“It’s nice that this is a very homeless-oriented proposal, but _for those of us who are homeowners who have invested our entire savings into our homes_ onto that block, it’s insufficient,” Keller said. {emphasis added}

I suspect the RV dwellers have a larger percentage of their funds invested in their homes than the homeowners do.  It appears to mainly be a class issue, assuming the RVers aren’t overrepresented in lawless behavior in the neighborhoods.

I do respect property rights.  The question is whether a mortgage confers property rights in the street.

For a few years (well before I was conscious of the boondock plan) I’ve predicted the American economic situation will become more amenable to nomads who can move where labor is needed.