3 ms·
It is worthwhile to recognize that there is nothing unusual in this response, many homeowners feel this way. But then by same token we can also move to justify
by quadrifoliate 5y ago
It is worthwhile to recognize that there is nothing unusual in this response, many homeowners feel this way.
But then by same token we can also move to justifying other things, like not hiring people without CS degrees (I spent $xxx,xxx on my CS degree, I want to protect its value), only hiring other MBAs, only hiring people with prior experience in tech companies etc. – which can perpetuate and amplify inequality in opportunity among society.
At what point do we move from that to a more altruistic viewpoint? I am genuinely not sure.
- kody 5y agoThere's "wanting to protect the value of your home" and there's "I'm going to vote NIMBY/BANANA and screw everybody else out of a place to live because I decided to 'invest' all my money in this house and expect it to be a nest egg that catapults me out of the working class." It sounds like the parent is in the latter category. Is the problem "losing value in my house" or "not realizing astronomical gains like my peers"? And if building much-needed housing does decrease your house's value then hey, maybe your house was overvalued at the price you paid and you made a bad 'investment'. Why punish everyone else and artificially strangle housing supply to cover your bad decision?