3 ms·
Other than wealthy suburbs that are exclusive by their very nature the "housing crisis" only exists in a couple cities. Those "forces" of which you speak don't
by throwaway0a5e 6y ago
Other than wealthy suburbs that are exclusive by their very nature the "housing crisis" only exists in a couple cities. Those "forces" of which you speak don't seem to exist (or if they do they don't have teeth) in most places.
- curuinor 6y agothe crisis doesn't exist for most lumps of land, but it exists for most _people_ because the places where the housing crisis is, is where the people are. NYC has more people in it than a third of the landmass of the US
- jcims 6y agoFor people that don't have the means to find housing nor the ability to relocate it's fair to call it a crisis. Their health and welfare is directly at risk and they have limited facility to do anything about it. For everyone else I'd call it a shortage.
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago>the crisis doesn't exist for most lumps of land, but it exists for most _people_ No it does not. This "crisis" is mostly a west coast thing and mostly confined to CA at that. Boston, NYC , DC, Chicago, Atlanta, Houston, Dallas do not have these problems. You need to be wealthy to live in their wealthy suburbs or downtown but every city on the planet is like that and for the most part these cities do not have any sort of housing "crisis". Rents are always higher than people would prefer but for the most part housing is available at all price points in these cities.
- closeparen 6y agoThe insistence on low-intensity suburbia is everywhere, it’s just that most metro areas can make arbitrarily much of it. Why fight with the neighbors over infill when there’s a cornfield next to an interstate 15 minutes from downtown?