5 ms·
But my point is why must people live on that land? Why not go live on some other land nearby? What is the foundational belief backing the idea that everyone s
by dimino 10y ago
But my point is why must people live on that land? Why not go live on some other land nearby? What is the foundational belief backing the idea that everyone should be able to live everywhere?
- ricardobeat 10y agoFriends, places, social circles, kids in school... You can change all of that, but would you like to?
- URSpider94 10y agoMy belief, and I believe the belief of many others, is that the people who work in your city should be able to live there. If all of your school teachers, fire fighters, and police, not to mention store clerks and janitors, can't afford to live in your town, then that's unsustainable in the long term. At the moment, it's likely that these folks are commuting 40, 50 or more miles into PA to work every day from the South or East.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- lgieron 10y ago> then that's unsustainable in the long term I agree that it sucks, but I'm not sure if it's unsustainable. There are plenty of worse situations in the world that pretty long-lasting.
- Hondor 10y agoIsn't that their choice if they want to work so far from where they live? Can't they get a job somewhere else, like in their own neigborhood? These teachers, firemen and policemen must be really hanging to the edge of long term unemployment if they're only able to work in this one small far-away neighborhood. Perhaps the problem then is that we have an oversupply of such workers and those most unemployable who have no choice except Palo Alto should consider changing careers.
- mk89 10y agoI am not sure about what would happen if such people decided from one day to the other to work in their towns. No more policemen, no more teachers, ... ?
- briandear 10y agoThe market would take over. Very few people want to teach in dangerous inner city neighborhoods, but salaries and incentives induce people to those areas. If the police and teachers left, salaries would rise to correct the imbalance. Right now salaries are such that people are willing to work in those areas so the market is working. New York is also crazy expensive yet there's actually a shortage. People are willing to pay those high prices.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- EliRivers 10y agoIn a sensible system, local taxes would go up and up to be able to pay these necessary workers enough money to live there, which would also act to make the place less attractive and thus lower prices. As it is, we have a system in which rich people get to pick when such a system operates and when it doesn't.
- cmdrfred 10y agoAlso consider that if town X is 45 minutes from city Y and city Y pays wages that are 25% higher. Applicants will flock from town X to city Y in order to take advantage of stronger wages. Thus this will increase supply and drive wages back down.
- eru 10y agoNot everyone can live everywhere. But the people living in the most desirable places (thus excluding someone else from living there) should probably pay society for that privilege.
- kofejnik 10y agoit's the other way around - there's nothing magical about Palo Alto specifically, it's only through people who live and work there the place becomes desirable so they don't owe the society anything, the society owes them
- eru 10y agoSure, that's why they should have land taxes everywhere. It's least bad form of taxation.
- EliRivers 10y agoThere is no such belief. Argue like an adult.
- dang 10y agoThis comment breaks the HN guidelines. Please post civilly and substantively, or not at all. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]