4 ms·
Not literally forever, of course, but I think it's naive to say people's inability to have the lifestyle they want will deter increasing rents. Empirically, soc
by psyc 10y ago
Not literally forever, of course, but I think it's naive to say people's inability to have the lifestyle they want will deter increasing rents. Empirically, society on balance doesn't care one tiny bit how much hardship people endure, and people will endure the hardship. I'm not seeing what mechanism is assumed to counter that.
- orangecat 10y agoI'm not seeing what mechanism is assumed to counter that. Increasing supply. Which in this case is difficult due to the alliance of existing property owners and useful idiot "anti-gentrification" protestors.
- Bartweiss 10y agoIt's also difficult for the more fundamental reason that space is one of the harder goods to 'manufacture'. We're not running out of land, obviously, but for standards like "land within 3 miles of the city center and -100 to 500 feet of the surface", that's much tougher. Not full, but crowded and with exponentially-rising development costs (since construction gets more difficult and annoys more people). Of course, that's a problem I associate with NYC, LA, etc. SF (and probably London?) get blocked politically before they ever reach that point.
- stale2002 10y agoThere is lots of free space within 3 miles of these cities. It is just in the air.
- nosuchthing 10y ago1. Repeal prop 13. 2. Apply local or state taxes and penalties against empty lots and housing/retail units without real tenets. 3. Reevaluate property tax annually and apply land tax for dense urban cores to encourage mixed development and high density units.