3 ms·
"By putting those infrastructure costs exclusively on the developer, you're basically taxing poverty, because those costs will all have to go on to the new poor
by mountaineer22 11y ago
"By putting those infrastructure costs exclusively on the developer, you're basically taxing poverty, because those costs will all have to go on to the new poor residents."
Can you explain that?
I don't understand..you lost me.
- ec109685 11y agoInstead of the burden of paying for additional services to support additional housing being spread around to all residents, if you bake the cost into the permitting process, developers will be forced to charge more for the new housing to make up the cost.
- mountaineer22 11y agoI guess we are not on the same page. So, how does this work? More specifically, what ensures the new development is "affordable"? Surely, the deciding factor is not the permit cost.
- hodwik2 11y agoAs the supply increases, and a greater proportion of demand is met, the cost will decrease. Remember this from Econ 101?
- Retric 11y agoOr build smaller homes 40k @ 6% is only 200$ a month. Further people would be paying this anyway and new development directly competes with normal home sales. It may promote smaller homes, but that increases affordability.
- mountaineer22 11y agoHow do you ensure it sells for $40k and the person that buys it lives in it (not renting or sub-leasing for a profit)?
- tamana 11y agoDoesn't matter. The point is to push the inventory mix toward smaller dwellings. Someone who want a big house won't buy 5 little ones.