>I’m not sure why this particular structure has provoked so much more outrage than the previous ones. Nobody heard about the building in Michigan, so nobody ta

>I’m not sure why this particular structure has provoked so much more outrage than the previous ones. Nobody heard about the building in Michigan, so nobody talked about it. Also, in Ann Arbor it's very likely that the CoL is not so high that students are de facto forced to tolerate these conditions. It's not really Munger who's the villain here, he instead plays the role of an enabler. There's no inherent reason that housing costs should be so high that students have to live in these awful boxes, it's because of the policies chosen by the City of Santa Barbara. For context, the population density in SB is about a quarter of that in SF. What's outrageous is that students pay the price in mental health and fire safety for housing policy that benefits the well-off and well-connected seeking aesthetics and investment returns. What motivates people to comment is the implied risk of this callous abuse of construction restrictions ("zoning") being extended to other vulnerable populations.