3 ms·
It's fun to blame the super rich but I'd say it's fundamentally due to a combination of population shift from rural to urban areas https://ourworldindata.org/g
by exporectomy 5y ago
It's fun to blame the super rich but I'd say it's fundamentally due to a combination of population shift from rural to urban areas
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/urban-and-rural-population?country=~USA https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/urban-and-rural-populatio...
and normal homeowners stopping densification out of fear of reducing the value of their own home or just not wanting the riff-raff living near them. These people are really the ones doing a directly harmful thing for pure selfish greed. They're not super-rich, they're just people's parents. But they're trying to make money by excluding others instead of doing anything useful.
- somethoughts 5y agoAgree! It's also the densification of urban areas. Where once each occupant had a private office, now 5-6 SW engineers occupy the same office space footprint. That has implications for already dense urban office and associated housing needs.
- jackcosgrove 5y agoThe long-term trend in urban housing is diffusion, not densification. One hundred years ago a family of five lived in an apartment now occupied by a couple.
- exporectomy 5y agoI was surprised to learn that the population (and density) of Manhattan was higher 100 years ago than it is today. It's been falling pretty steadily throughout the entire 1900s.