3 ms·
It's a vicious cycle – OP and others are forced to commit most of their wealth to own a home because of all the NIMBYs that came before them, and on and on.
by granshaw 5y ago
It's a vicious cycle – OP and others are forced to commit most of their wealth to own a home because of all the NIMBYs that came before them, and on and on.
- JAlexoid 5y agoNah... That's just ignorance. It's like the American opposition to pedestrianization of blocks. Pedestrianized blocks increase local business footfall and increase high margin economic activity. New developments in your community increase value of your home, far better than restricting development.
- rabuse 5y agoHow's that? Genuinely curious.
- JAlexoid 5y agoOpposition to development hurts the homeowners value, a lot. The value of your home doesn't only depend on the fact that it's in a rich neighborhood with beautiful lawns, but the services and proximity to said services. NYC is desireable, not because it's a big city... but because you can get services there. Take away the services - you take away all of the value proposition.
- rabuse 5y agoIn my area, we have everything around us (big retailers, malls, nightlife, etc.) in the suburbs in a well-off area in South Florida. How would adding more houses appreciate my property's value?
- JAlexoid 5y agoMore people = more service consumers = more jobs = higher demand for housing = higher demand for services