4 ms·

Another way to look at it is that there is absurd amounts of empty land throughout the country. Places were undesirable and cheap, and people of moderate means

Another way to look at it is that there is absurd amounts of empty land throughout the country. Places were undesirable and cheap, and people of moderate means bought them, improved the area, and over decades it became a desirable area. Young people need to go to shitty places that are cheap and then make the place better. Many young people want to live in SF or NYC. Go to Detroit instead.

lmm 5y ago
> Places were undesirable and cheap, and people of moderate means bought them, improved the area, and over decades it became a desirable area. Generally by doing things that are now illegal (sometimes that were already illegal but not enforced at the time).
- pdonis 5y ago
  What things described in this article are now illegal?
  - denton-scratch 5y ago
    Well, the author described an illegal one-room micro-apartment in downtown SF.
  - lmm 5y ago
    The article explicitly points out that the shed they originally lived in would certainly be illegal now (and quite possibly also at the time, but it was easier to get away with then); building their own cabin would also be a lot more difficult (maybe it's not flat out illegal, but there are a lot more requirements about what kind of qualifications you have to have to sign off on a design, do wiring/plumbing/...).
vinceguidry 5y ago
The process of making unwanted real estate wanted is called real estate development. It's not done by "young people just moving there." That just makes crappy real estate more crowded. Real estate development is very much a "build it and they will come" sort of deal. It takes capital, a lot of it, to make an area desirable. You can't just dump it anywhere, there has to be a good reason to dump it in this particular area otherwise the hip young people will go somewhere that did have a good reason. And the poor investors who poured money into a development in that area won't see any appreciation or significant profit, because no one else is developing the area, just them. Lots and lots and lots of money going into lots and lots and lots of developments, that's what turns the sticks into the burbs. You just can't put the family cart before the development horse, every young person starting a family has different reasons for moving out to the sticks. Left alone without already-developed real estate, they'll just spread out evenly across rural America.
- paulryanrogers 5y ago
  What are the good reasons to develop an area? Proximity to a better one? Fresh water sources? Desirable weather? Good schools? Unpolluted environment? Nice parks?
  - vinceguidry 5y ago
    All of these things. The more the better, and places with better potential get developed first. Commercial opportunities tend to be developed first, followed by better weather. As all these places got developed, tertiary concerns become more important. Rural America will mostly stay rural and suburbs will slowly develop economies and become part of the metro areas they surround.
    - buck4roo 5y ago
      Suburbs are a Ponzi scheme. They do not cover their existing infrastructure maintenance costs... https://youtu.be/7IsMeKl-Sv0 https://youtu.be/7IsMeKl-Sv0
- pdonis 5y ago
  Perhaps the problem with the availability of housing is the "real estate development" model you describe, which is capital intensive and therefore will be undertaken by large corporations instead of by the people who will actually live in the area and who therefore have a personal stake in how livable it is. Perhaps if more development was done by "young people just moving there", we would have more livable areas and less competition for housing.
  - vinceguidry 5y ago
    Ordinary people don't have the money to, say, build sewers and roads.
    - pdonis 5y ago
      They do if they pool their resources through, say, property taxes paid to their locality. Localities can build out basic infrastructure without having to have large corporations do all the development. That has the added advantage that you get actual communities that grow and evolve over time instead of sterile cookie cutter suburbs.
ip26 5y ago
That’s at the root of all these stories about, ”I can’t afford to live where I grew up”. Buddy, I can’t either, but when my parents bought it was a fruit orchard. Today it’s the hottest real estate market in the world. It’s apples and oranges.
- HarryHirsch 5y ago
  A colleague told me about her daughter - she finished college and has a regular job but cannot afford to move out. That's in rustbelt central. Yes, you can live with roommates, but if you are late 20's it becomes awkward, and when at some point the children arrive it becomes a habitability issue.
  - refurb 5y ago
    Living with roommates or even your parents is pretty common globally. Not the end of the world.
    - HarryHirsch 5y ago
      Dr Zhivago is a role model now? Also, they didn't have code enforcement then and minimum numbers of bedrooms.
  - SyzygistSix 5y ago
    I mostly agree with your point but how does living with roommates become awkward?

lmm 5y ago

> Places were undesirable and cheap, and people of moderate means bought them, improved the area, and over decades it became a desirable area. Generally by doing things that are now illegal (sometimes that were already illegal but not enforced at the time).

pdonis 5y ago
What things described in this article are now illegal?
- denton-scratch 5y ago
  Well, the author described an illegal one-room micro-apartment in downtown SF.
- lmm 5y ago
  The article explicitly points out that the shed they originally lived in would certainly be illegal now (and quite possibly also at the time, but it was easier to get away with then); building their own cabin would also be a lot more difficult (maybe it's not flat out illegal, but there are a lot more requirements about what kind of qualifications you have to have to sign off on a design, do wiring/plumbing/...).

vinceguidry 5y ago

The process of making unwanted real estate wanted is called real estate development. It's not done by "young people just moving there." That just makes crappy real estate more crowded. Real estate development is very much a "build it and they will come" sort of deal. It takes capital, a lot of it, to make an area desirable. You can't just dump it anywhere, there has to be a good reason to dump it in this particular area otherwise the hip young people will go somewhere that did have a good reason. And the poor investors who poured money into a development in that area won't see any appreciation or significant profit, because no one else is developing the area, just them. Lots and lots and lots of money going into lots and lots and lots of developments, that's what turns the sticks into the burbs. You just can't put the family cart before the development horse, every young person starting a family has different reasons for moving out to the sticks. Left alone without already-developed real estate, they'll just spread out evenly across rural America.

paulryanrogers 5y ago
What are the good reasons to develop an area? Proximity to a better one? Fresh water sources? Desirable weather? Good schools? Unpolluted environment? Nice parks?
- vinceguidry 5y ago
  All of these things. The more the better, and places with better potential get developed first. Commercial opportunities tend to be developed first, followed by better weather. As all these places got developed, tertiary concerns become more important. Rural America will mostly stay rural and suburbs will slowly develop economies and become part of the metro areas they surround.
  - buck4roo 5y ago
    Suburbs are a Ponzi scheme. They do not cover their existing infrastructure maintenance costs... https://youtu.be/7IsMeKl-Sv0 https://youtu.be/7IsMeKl-Sv0
pdonis 5y ago
Perhaps the problem with the availability of housing is the "real estate development" model you describe, which is capital intensive and therefore will be undertaken by large corporations instead of by the people who will actually live in the area and who therefore have a personal stake in how livable it is. Perhaps if more development was done by "young people just moving there", we would have more livable areas and less competition for housing.
- vinceguidry 5y ago
  Ordinary people don't have the money to, say, build sewers and roads.
  - pdonis 5y ago
    They do if they pool their resources through, say, property taxes paid to their locality. Localities can build out basic infrastructure without having to have large corporations do all the development. That has the added advantage that you get actual communities that grow and evolve over time instead of sterile cookie cutter suburbs.

ip26 5y ago

That’s at the root of all these stories about, ”I can’t afford to live where I grew up”. Buddy, I can’t either, but when my parents bought it was a fruit orchard. Today it’s the hottest real estate market in the world. It’s apples and oranges.

HarryHirsch 5y ago
A colleague told me about her daughter - she finished college and has a regular job but cannot afford to move out. That's in rustbelt central. Yes, you can live with roommates, but if you are late 20's it becomes awkward, and when at some point the children arrive it becomes a habitability issue.
- refurb 5y ago
  Living with roommates or even your parents is pretty common globally. Not the end of the world.
  - HarryHirsch 5y ago
    Dr Zhivago is a role model now? Also, they didn't have code enforcement then and minimum numbers of bedrooms.
- SyzygistSix 5y ago
  I mostly agree with your point but how does living with roommates become awkward?