4 ms·

Only the rich would have spacious living arrangements, and in larger cities only the rich would own anything at all. The rent would be very high. Anyone below,

by api 6y ago

Only the rich would have spacious living arrangements, and in larger cities only the rich would own anything at all. The rent would be very high. Anyone below, say, upper middle class would live in crowded slums. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_rent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_rent You can see this today in dense cities where everyone leaves as soon as they have kids because they can't afford space.

Valgrim 6y ago
Housing cooperatives are very common in cities and are an attempt at breaking this cycle; you don't own your home, but a share in the apartment block. Because it is not operated for profit, the rent is so low that you can afford to accumulate and invest your capital in other ways (such as creating a business).
- zdragnar 6y ago
  I visited a few housing co-ops near the university where I went to school, and you couldn't find a more disgusting, run down place to live in the city if you had tried. That was more of a rental than an ownership situation, which I suspect changes the equation a bit. Either way, co-ops are definitely not a magical solution.
southerntofu 6y ago
> Only the rich would have spacious living arrangements, and in larger cities only the rich would own anything at all. The rent would be very high. Anyone below, say, upper middle class would live in crowded slums. I'm sorry but how is that different from the present situation? There's slums around most cities in the world, including here in France or in the US. People may more than half of their wage (sometimes all of it) to get stuck into often-indecent housing. For most people, ownership is not even a dream, because the worry of having to struggle for monthly survival does not give you time and mindspace to dream. In fact, i would argue a serious public policy for public transports would have opposite consequences. The very real rural exodus has been exacerbated by public policies favoring life in big cities, but we could turn the tide. The continuing closing of many local shops (bars, bakeries, smaller supermarkets) on the countryside has consequences: it makes life on the countryside less possible/attractive without a car, it makes life more expensive for those who have a car, and it destroys social life and neighborhood culture. So the problem of housing is very real. However, it's an artificial problem. There's tons of unhappy people stuck in the ghettos around the big cities (here in western Europe the rich live in city center, not the suburbs), and tons of empty houses on the countryside to be bought for the equivalent of 5-100 months rent in the city (good opportunities for ownership), but there is no government program to make the connection between these two worlds that do not know each other. Also, even in the big cities, the prices are not driven by population but by speculation. For example, in Paris it's more than 1 million empty housing units (not secondary housing, actually ABANDONED housing), which is more than two apartments for every homeless person in the whole of France. Why are there laws (private property) to prevent people from having a home, that's another debate. But it's evident from statistics all across the western world that there is something wrong, and if someone in power really wanted to help anyone (spoiler: they never do) they could just do it by snapping their fingers.

by api 6y ago

Valgrim 6y ago

Housing cooperatives are very common in cities and are an attempt at breaking this cycle; you don't own your home, but a share in the apartment block. Because it is not operated for profit, the rent is so low that you can afford to accumulate and invest your capital in other ways (such as creating a business).

zdragnar 6y ago
I visited a few housing co-ops near the university where I went to school, and you couldn't find a more disgusting, run down place to live in the city if you had tried. That was more of a rental than an ownership situation, which I suspect changes the equation a bit. Either way, co-ops are definitely not a magical solution.

southerntofu 6y ago

> Only the rich would have spacious living arrangements, and in larger cities only the rich would own anything at all. The rent would be very high. Anyone below, say, upper middle class would live in crowded slums. I'm sorry but how is that different from the present situation? There's slums around most cities in the world, including here in France or in the US. People may more than half of their wage (sometimes all of it) to get stuck into often-indecent housing. For most people, ownership is not even a dream, because the worry of having to struggle for monthly survival does not give you time and mindspace to dream. In fact, i would argue a serious public policy for public transports would have opposite consequences. The very real rural exodus has been exacerbated by public policies favoring life in big cities, but we could turn the tide. The continuing closing of many local shops (bars, bakeries, smaller supermarkets) on the countryside has consequences: it makes life on the countryside less possible/attractive without a car, it makes life more expensive for those who have a car, and it destroys social life and neighborhood culture. So the problem of housing is very real. However, it's an artificial problem. There's tons of unhappy people stuck in the ghettos around the big cities (here in western Europe the rich live in city center, not the suburbs), and tons of empty houses on the countryside to be bought for the equivalent of 5-100 months rent in the city (good opportunities for ownership), but there is no government program to make the connection between these two worlds that do not know each other. Also, even in the big cities, the prices are not driven by population but by speculation. For example, in Paris it's more than 1 million empty housing units (not secondary housing, actually ABANDONED housing), which is more than two apartments for every homeless person in the whole of France. Why are there laws (private property) to prevent people from having a home, that's another debate. But it's evident from statistics all across the western world that there is something wrong, and if someone in power really wanted to help anyone (spoiler: they never do) they could just do it by snapping their fingers.