8 ms·
> The problem is that no one wants to live there because living in dense cities for whatever reason is extremely appealing now. I think you answered the "whate
by jogjayr 9y ago
> The problem is that no one wants to live there because living in dense cities for whatever reason is extremely appealing now.
I think you answered the "whatever reason" with your next sentence.
> The price of a house grows exponentially with the minimum travel time to a metropolis from it.
Jobs are in metropolises and people prefer shorter commutes over longer ones.
- zeth___ 9y agoAs someone who lives in the center of a large city: no. It's not the work commute. It's everything else. Having a coffee shop at the bottom of my lift. Having 4 super markets within walking distance. Having 200+ restaurants to pick from. Museums when I get bored, book shops, theaters, cinemas, meetups, hacker spaces the list goes on. Having to commute for an hour would give me enough time to wake up. My previous job was 5 minutes walking from where I lived, my current one is 8. I take a detour through a park to make it 30 so I can drink a coffee before I get in. That people are complaining that they can't afford that and making it into an issue on the same level as getting food and drink is ridiculous. Housing prices are a systemic problem that needs to be addressed. The way to address it is by cutting demand. Build up infrastructure in rural areas so I can actually get decent internet, that bridges don't feel like they will fall down if I drive over them too quickly. Change the regulations so only livable units are built in cities. Change the requirements that non-citizens can't own more than 50% of a dwelling. There is a huge number of tweaks that could solve the housing affordability problem.
- pcwalton 9y agoCutting demand is what California has been trying since the '70s. It's a failed approach.