4 ms·

> Every city needs people who do lower paying jobs. Someone has to clean those office buildings, someone has to take care of sick people at hospitals, someone h

> Every city needs people who do lower paying jobs. Someone has to clean those office buildings, someone has to take care of sick people at hospitals, someone has to drive taxis, buses, ... By not supplying those people with affordable housing within the city they're lives only become worse (more money and time spent commuting, less time spent with family and friends). They can live in the suburbs. Nobody has a special right to live in a specific place. They can commute like everybody else.

2ion 7y ago
The suburbs (literally "bacon belt", wealthy exurbs) are even more expensive (after rapidly getting cheaper after 40-50km out from the city, but 2 hour commutes one way are very hard to sell at German salaries). Plus there's insufficient transport for getting the masses into the city already. Moving people more outwards won't work because these issues may get addressed after 10s of years.
claudeganon 7y ago
This is just literally privatizing the cost of reproducing the city onto its lowest paid workers, i.e., entirely regressive. Why should those guaranteeing the very basic functioning of a place (janitors, firefighters, nurses, etc) bear not only the burden of lower wages, but now also terrible commutes? There’s no sane logic behind this kind of sentiment besides “might makes right,” which is fueling the rise of “eat the rich” populism.
- codedokode 7y ago
  Then it should be skilled, talented workers who should live in a place without public transport, buy expensive cars and gasoline and spend hours in traffic jams?
  - claudeganon 7y ago
    No. Cities should be invested in and planned to make themselves affordable and accommodating to all of the labor they need to exist, instead of “skilled, talented workers” shoving off all of the misery onto lower wage workers just because they can get away with it. It’s not zero sum. Look at cities in developed countries like Japan, Austria, Singapore, or the less Capitalist parts of Europe.
    - cyrksoft 7y ago
      < less capitalist parts of Europe. If you want socialist paradise see Cuba, Venezuela and the rest of Latin America. Come live here and you’ll see how well it works. Government doesn’t have a special power with future vision, nobody does. Let people decide their life, where to live. Move to other places if you want cheap living costs.
    - nickik 7y ago
      Nonsense. Japan is doing a good job at expending housing because they actually have a capitalistic approch to expention of houses in large cities. Its easy and cheap to build more buildings. The exact thing all of these socialist style regulations depress and systematically restrict. And their is ZERO evidence that 'less capitalistc' parts of Europe do a better job. For the most part those parts are cheaper because nobody wants to live their and the population moves to the more capitalistic parts and that's why prices are going up there.

2ion 7y ago

The suburbs (literally "bacon belt", wealthy exurbs) are even more expensive (after rapidly getting cheaper after 40-50km out from the city, but 2 hour commutes one way are very hard to sell at German salaries). Plus there's insufficient transport for getting the masses into the city already. Moving people more outwards won't work because these issues may get addressed after 10s of years.

claudeganon 7y ago

This is just literally privatizing the cost of reproducing the city onto its lowest paid workers, i.e., entirely regressive. Why should those guaranteeing the very basic functioning of a place (janitors, firefighters, nurses, etc) bear not only the burden of lower wages, but now also terrible commutes? There’s no sane logic behind this kind of sentiment besides “might makes right,” which is fueling the rise of “eat the rich” populism.

codedokode 7y ago
Then it should be skilled, talented workers who should live in a place without public transport, buy expensive cars and gasoline and spend hours in traffic jams?
- claudeganon 7y ago
  No. Cities should be invested in and planned to make themselves affordable and accommodating to all of the labor they need to exist, instead of “skilled, talented workers” shoving off all of the misery onto lower wage workers just because they can get away with it. It’s not zero sum. Look at cities in developed countries like Japan, Austria, Singapore, or the less Capitalist parts of Europe.
  - cyrksoft 7y ago
    < less capitalist parts of Europe. If you want socialist paradise see Cuba, Venezuela and the rest of Latin America. Come live here and you’ll see how well it works. Government doesn’t have a special power with future vision, nobody does. Let people decide their life, where to live. Move to other places if you want cheap living costs.
  - nickik 7y ago
    Nonsense. Japan is doing a good job at expending housing because they actually have a capitalistic approch to expention of houses in large cities. Its easy and cheap to build more buildings. The exact thing all of these socialist style regulations depress and systematically restrict. And their is ZERO evidence that 'less capitalistc' parts of Europe do a better job. For the most part those parts are cheaper because nobody wants to live their and the population moves to the more capitalistic parts and that's why prices are going up there.