4 ms·
Worth noting that this isn’t mandating more housing, it’s (proposing) removing an artificial constraint. This constraint is the land use equivalent of taxi med
by troydavis 5y ago
Worth noting that this isn’t mandating more housing, it’s (proposing) removing an artificial constraint.
This constraint is the land use equivalent of taxi medallions: the chosen supply cap is arbitrary and it hasn’t evolved in decades.
And as with removing the arbitrary cap on taxi supply, not everyone is going to like this change. Taxi medallions were a great system for those who owned them. The externalities were borne by passengers and other potential drivers.
- MichaelZuo 5y agoThe taxi medallions might not be the example your looking for because passengers, other drivers, and residents also benefited from the positive externalities generated by limiting the number of cars circling around waiting for fares. It’s not clear that the system generated a net negative externality at all, it could very well have been positive overall. Which if applied to SF property…