3 ms·

Agreed. That said, a huge portion of metropolitan California cities are stricken with inflation. If you drive down the cost of every home that's $3M to $800 acr

by kodah 6y ago

Agreed. That said, a huge portion of metropolitan California cities are stricken with inflation. If you drive down the cost of every home that's $3M to $800 across a majority of the city, where most people have loans for $3M then your good faith action may actually bankrupt your city and it's citizens over night. That's what we're discussing here.

whimsicalism 6y ago
I have so many objections to this line of thought. 1. We are so far from building enough to even lower the price of houses, let alone depreciate them from $3m to $800k. 2. The idea that most residents in SF have outstanding debts of $3m is just.. you need to get out in this city a little more. 3. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. If there is even a possibility that with more building, the cost of your home would go from $3m to $800k, you shouldn't be going into debt if you are planning on not living in this home for the rest of your life.
- kodah 6y ago
  First, I'm not projecting any kind of line of thought. Trace back my comments and I'm asking questions, because I genuinely do not know. It seems like there's a lot of directions to go but no definitive answers (what I referred to as a runaway train) Not everyone is here to argue with you, some of us are here to ask some thought provoking questions that we genuinely don't know the potential answers to. Second, I don't live in SF, I live in a different area. Inflation is an issue here too, and I am genuinely concerned about how remedies would impact not only people directly but the city and the state. If California or it's cities do bad, there are implications across the country. Telling me to "get out of the city" is a confusing statement given that I know people that have these kinds of debts. Three sounds like an empathy problem, so we can skip that one.

3 ms·

Agreed. That said, a huge portion of metropolitan California cities are stricken with inflation. If you drive down the cost of every home that's $3M to $800 acr

by kodah 6y ago

whimsicalism 6y ago
I have so many objections to this line of thought. 1. We are so far from building enough to even lower the price of houses, let alone depreciate them from $3m to $800k. 2. The idea that most residents in SF have outstanding debts of $3m is just.. you need to get out in this city a little more. 3. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. If there is even a possibility that with more building, the cost of your home would go from $3m to $800k, you shouldn't be going into debt if you are planning on not living in this home for the rest of your life.
- kodah 6y ago
  First, I'm not projecting any kind of line of thought. Trace back my comments and I'm asking questions, because I genuinely do not know. It seems like there's a lot of directions to go but no definitive answers (what I referred to as a runaway train) Not everyone is here to argue with you, some of us are here to ask some thought provoking questions that we genuinely don't know the potential answers to. Second, I don't live in SF, I live in a different area. Inflation is an issue here too, and I am genuinely concerned about how remedies would impact not only people directly but the city and the state. If California or it's cities do bad, there are implications across the country. Telling me to "get out of the city" is a confusing statement given that I know people that have these kinds of debts. Three sounds like an empathy problem, so we can skip that one.