3 ms·

> I can't afford to live in Carmel, Los Altos, etc, but I live where I can afford. Have you ever considered that maybe you should be able to afford to live in

> I can't afford to live in Carmel, Los Altos, etc, but I live where I can afford. Have you ever considered that maybe you should be able to afford to live in those places? That the wealthiest nation in the history of humanity ought to cultivate a society that encourages freedom of movement? That cordoning off sections exclusively for the rich leads to a decrease in empathy for the less fortunate? That safe housing and access to the amenities of a city ought not to be exclusively for those who happened to have the lucky combination of skills and money? Have you considered that the people you hope to exclude are people no different from you?

microcolonel 10y ago
The wealthiest nation in the history of humanity had the guts to build things they couldn't afford to give everyone. Some day everyone gets those things, and somebody like you will say: have you ever considered that maybe you should have a private aircraft? Inequalities like this only apply in the current frame of reference. Also, from the basic market perspective, it is entirely impossible for everyone to live in Carmel; and if everyone lived there, you'd want to live somewhere else.
jmspring 10y ago
My inlaws are from a part of Germany where I could buy a 60 square meter apartment for cash without really thinking about it (low 5 figures), my truck cost more. A similar sized apartment in Munich would be probably be at least 20x the cost. Should I expect the city of Munich to provide such a unit at a similar cost to the country side 3 hours away? No. No, I do not think every municipality has the requirement to provide affordable housing to everyone that has a desire to be there. Do I think regions need to do better at providing a balance of housing to accommodate the spectrum of people working jobs in the area? Yes. But should a single municipality be expected to accept everyone wanting to be there at a price that individual can afford? No. In the case of individuals (there are many in Santa Cruz) that don't want to work, want to live the way they want, and have done nothing for the community, the community has every right to say "no".
jknoepfler 10y ago
If we pretend scarcity doesn't exist, and that the proper way to deal with it isn't at least partially though the free market, then ok.
gxs 10y ago
Do you not see your own contradiction? If you want to give people freedom of movement, that includes giving like-minded people of similar means the right to cluster up and live where they choose. This is why it's so hard to take the "science" of economics and politics seriously. It's just arguing in circles. As for me- I'm with OP. I want to live in Beverly Hills, but tough shit I can't afford it so I live in Oakland close to my job. That said, we should keep opportunity open so that if someone wants to try to do something to generate enough value to be able to afford to live there, they should.
WalterBright 10y ago
Does this mean that I'm entitled to have someone else give me a house for free anywhere I want to live? If not, where are the limits on this largesse?
dave_sullivan 10y ago
You're essentially arguing for a "name your price" eBay. Scarcity in real estate is very much a real thing. How do you determine who gets what, if not by "highest bidder"? I'm free to live anywhere I want provided I can find the coin; to me, that's the definition of fair. In fact, the more you mess with that basic concept, the more you ensure someone willing and able to pay will be (unfairly) locked out of the market.
hueving 10y ago
Under your scheme I demand a penthouse room on a 100+ story high rise with a view of central park. The idea that everyone has a right to live anywhere they want is untenable and frankly idiotic. It's the same as saying everyone can have as much gold as they demand.

microcolonel 10y ago

The wealthiest nation in the history of humanity had the guts to build things they couldn't afford to give everyone. Some day everyone gets those things, and somebody like you will say: have you ever considered that maybe you should have a private aircraft? Inequalities like this only apply in the current frame of reference. Also, from the basic market perspective, it is entirely impossible for everyone to live in Carmel; and if everyone lived there, you'd want to live somewhere else.

jmspring 10y ago

My inlaws are from a part of Germany where I could buy a 60 square meter apartment for cash without really thinking about it (low 5 figures), my truck cost more. A similar sized apartment in Munich would be probably be at least 20x the cost. Should I expect the city of Munich to provide such a unit at a similar cost to the country side 3 hours away? No. No, I do not think every municipality has the requirement to provide affordable housing to everyone that has a desire to be there. Do I think regions need to do better at providing a balance of housing to accommodate the spectrum of people working jobs in the area? Yes. But should a single municipality be expected to accept everyone wanting to be there at a price that individual can afford? No. In the case of individuals (there are many in Santa Cruz) that don't want to work, want to live the way they want, and have done nothing for the community, the community has every right to say "no".

jknoepfler 10y ago

If we pretend scarcity doesn't exist, and that the proper way to deal with it isn't at least partially though the free market, then ok.

gxs 10y ago

Do you not see your own contradiction? If you want to give people freedom of movement, that includes giving like-minded people of similar means the right to cluster up and live where they choose. This is why it's so hard to take the "science" of economics and politics seriously. It's just arguing in circles. As for me- I'm with OP. I want to live in Beverly Hills, but tough shit I can't afford it so I live in Oakland close to my job. That said, we should keep opportunity open so that if someone wants to try to do something to generate enough value to be able to afford to live there, they should.

WalterBright 10y ago

Does this mean that I'm entitled to have someone else give me a house for free anywhere I want to live? If not, where are the limits on this largesse?

dave_sullivan 10y ago

You're essentially arguing for a "name your price" eBay. Scarcity in real estate is very much a real thing. How do you determine who gets what, if not by "highest bidder"? I'm free to live anywhere I want provided I can find the coin; to me, that's the definition of fair. In fact, the more you mess with that basic concept, the more you ensure someone willing and able to pay will be (unfairly) locked out of the market.

hueving 10y ago

Under your scheme I demand a penthouse room on a 100+ story high rise with a view of central park. The idea that everyone has a right to live anywhere they want is untenable and frankly idiotic. It's the same as saying everyone can have as much gold as they demand.