3 ms·
This totally ignores the positive impact of making housing available to those willing to pay the most for it. If a young professional is willing and able to pa
by CryptoPunk 5y ago
This totally ignores the positive impact of making housing available to those willing to pay the most for it.
If a young professional is willing and able to pay $3,000 a month for a unit, and a poor long-term resident is only willing and able to pay $2,000, renting to the former will lead to the more productive party gaining access to the high productivity neighbourhood.
If there is a 20% productivity boost from living in the high productivity location, and the young professional generates $12,000 a month in value, while the poor long-term resident generates $5,000 a month, allowing the young professional to outbid the poor long-term resident will lead to a $1,400 boost in monthly productivity.
That productivity boost in turn leads to more jobs created for more poor people.
- cloudfifty 5y ago> That productivity boost in turn leads to more jobs created for more poor people. So your take is that giving more money to the property owner will produce more jobs for poor people? As in trickle-down economics?
- CryptoPunk 5y agoIt is not just giving more money to the property owner. It's increasing how much is produced in total. Higher GDP == higher per capita GDP.