4 ms·

Is NYC a luxury? Absolutely. The access to institutions, the culture, the people, the shops, the history... all of that is a luxury. That's why people want to l

by muninn_ 10y ago

Is NYC a luxury? Absolutely. The access to institutions, the culture, the people, the shops, the history... all of that is a luxury. That's why people want to live there versus somewhere like Cleveland I guess. Once those cities are unaffordable for the very people you mention, they will just move to more affordable places where they have a better cost of living, and then they will bring ideas, creativity, and resurgence to these areas and make them better. If you're a critical worker, then surely you can demand a pay raise. If not, move. If somebody can replace you, you're not critical. If somebody can't replace you, they'll have to pay more. I'm not dismissive of the cost of these cities at all, nor the plight of those living there, but you get what you pay for. If you're a teacher in New York and you can't afford rent, move somewhere else instead. What else are you going to do? Rent control? Then you just have people who can never afford to build lasting wealth because they will just rent for life. There isn't a 'solution' to this 'problem' because it's just a basic fact of human organization. I'd love to live in Colorado, maybe Breckinridge, but I can't afford that. So I live somewhere else and visit. Does that suck? Yeah sure, it also sucks I can't buy a Ferrari. Ideally we want mixed-use development neighborhoods with differently priced homes for people with different income levels to live in. But it looks like without the government enforcing it, that isn't going to happen.

jamespitts 10y ago
I do not think that big city life should be a luxury, any more than the internet or computing should be a luxuries. While it is beneficial to improve districts, the migratory upgrading of urban areas is an economic model that may be problematic for the population. People need to get work done and take care of their families, not constantly deal with a series of dismal choices and life-uprooting changes. Instead of waiting for price bubbles, wage bubbles, hostile populations causing problems due to inadequate conditions, perhaps cities should work on the infrastructure of growth. There are many necessary conditions for civilization that governments enforce or produce. I argue that generating NYC conditions for the general population is one of them.
- ghaff 10y ago
  >I argue that generating NYC conditions for the general population is one of them. OMG, I certainly hope not. They'd certainly better not try to generate NYC conditions for me.
  - jamespitts 10y ago
    Yeah that isn't for everyone! Whatever the category of neighborhood -- big city or small town or even country -- there are minimum requirements for a decent life that IMO the community is morally obligated to create.
- paulddraper 10y ago
  > I do not think that big city life should be a luxury, any more than the internet or computing should be a luxuries. The difference is scarcity. Computers and internet are can be produced at very cheap costs. Whereas, almost by definition, urban real estate is scare and in high demand. If it weren't, it wouldn't be crowded.
  - jamespitts 10y ago
    Agreed that the core issue is scarcity. Often scarcity can be addressed if the community decides that it is harmful or not necessary.
- muninn_ 10y ago
  Well, big cities (using this term very generally) don't have to be. All you have to do, as you pointed out, is to improve the infrastructure of growth. Oh and recreate the unique cultural and economic conditions. Oh and you also have to do that for every city in the world. It's just unrealistic. The pragmatic thing to do is just make one move and move out of the big city. You can lead a nice life in many places. Move to Alabama or something. I can't afford a big city and I have a great life where I live. I visit those big cities when I want instead of dealing with the hour commute and sky-high prices.
user5994461 10y ago
> Is NYC a luxury? Absolutely. The access to institutions, the culture, the people, the shops, the history... all of that is a luxury. That's why people want to live there versus somewhere like Cleveland I guess. That's what I keep saying about Paris. One should put down the Eiffel Tower, it will make rent and buying cheaper for everyone. Don't care about that big building. Didn't choose the shop, the people, the luxury... Just forced to be in the capital to have a job.

by muninn_ 10y ago

jamespitts 10y ago

I do not think that big city life should be a luxury, any more than the internet or computing should be a luxuries. While it is beneficial to improve districts, the migratory upgrading of urban areas is an economic model that may be problematic for the population. People need to get work done and take care of their families, not constantly deal with a series of dismal choices and life-uprooting changes. Instead of waiting for price bubbles, wage bubbles, hostile populations causing problems due to inadequate conditions, perhaps cities should work on the infrastructure of growth. There are many necessary conditions for civilization that governments enforce or produce. I argue that generating NYC conditions for the general population is one of them.

ghaff 10y ago
>I argue that generating NYC conditions for the general population is one of them. OMG, I certainly hope not. They'd certainly better not try to generate NYC conditions for me.
- jamespitts 10y ago
  Yeah that isn't for everyone! Whatever the category of neighborhood -- big city or small town or even country -- there are minimum requirements for a decent life that IMO the community is morally obligated to create.
paulddraper 10y ago
> I do not think that big city life should be a luxury, any more than the internet or computing should be a luxuries. The difference is scarcity. Computers and internet are can be produced at very cheap costs. Whereas, almost by definition, urban real estate is scare and in high demand. If it weren't, it wouldn't be crowded.
- jamespitts 10y ago
  Agreed that the core issue is scarcity. Often scarcity can be addressed if the community decides that it is harmful or not necessary.
muninn_ 10y ago
Well, big cities (using this term very generally) don't have to be. All you have to do, as you pointed out, is to improve the infrastructure of growth. Oh and recreate the unique cultural and economic conditions. Oh and you also have to do that for every city in the world. It's just unrealistic. The pragmatic thing to do is just make one move and move out of the big city. You can lead a nice life in many places. Move to Alabama or something. I can't afford a big city and I have a great life where I live. I visit those big cities when I want instead of dealing with the hour commute and sky-high prices.

user5994461 10y ago

> Is NYC a luxury? Absolutely. The access to institutions, the culture, the people, the shops, the history... all of that is a luxury. That's why people want to live there versus somewhere like Cleveland I guess. That's what I keep saying about Paris. One should put down the Eiffel Tower, it will make rent and buying cheaper for everyone. Don't care about that big building. Didn't choose the shop, the people, the luxury... Just forced to be in the capital to have a job.