3 ms·

I am doubting the argument from the https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31886280 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31886280 which is a variant of the argume

I am doubting the argument from the https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31886280 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31886280 which is a variant of the argument repeated in every thread about housing on HN. Namely: people do want dense housing because dense housing in the areas like Manhattan is very expensive. "Prices are too high" is the "proof" part of this argument. My doubt is based on two facts: rich people don't go for the dense living even in these areas and nobody is building residential high raises in the cheap areas, which would have been a huge missed opportunity if there had been a genuine demand for the dense living conditions.

nrr 4y ago
Aha! Yeah, I can agree with that. I think the thing that people on HN don't think about or make explicit in this kind of argumentation is that there are certain amenities that folks prefer to have nearby, and they kind of miss the neighborhood for the houses, as it were. It isn't necessarily the density itself driving the demand; it's often the reasonableness of, e.g., being able to send a child off to the post office or supermarket to run an errand. Therein lies the rub: Density tends to be a sufficient condition for enabling that. That said, beyond a certain wealth stratum, none of this really winds up applying anyway, so it's less useful to talk about those folks would do.
- pandaman 4y ago
  It is prudent to analyze behavior that is not constrained by affordability when arguing about desirability. Otherwise you can easily deduce that people (en masse) genuinely like renting, flying couch, industrially processed food, malt liquor, cars that are at least ten years old etc.
- droidist2 4y ago
  >It isn't necessarily the density itself driving the demand; it's often the reasonableness of, e.g., being able to send a child off to the post office or supermarket to run an errand. Therein lies the rub: Density tends to be a sufficient condition for enabling that. Which is exactly what I said: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31891305 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31891305 Saying "Well if people love their density so much, why don't rich people cram themselves in the tightest possible density" is a strawman.

nrr 4y ago

Aha! Yeah, I can agree with that. I think the thing that people on HN don't think about or make explicit in this kind of argumentation is that there are certain amenities that folks prefer to have nearby, and they kind of miss the neighborhood for the houses, as it were. It isn't necessarily the density itself driving the demand; it's often the reasonableness of, e.g., being able to send a child off to the post office or supermarket to run an errand. Therein lies the rub: Density tends to be a sufficient condition for enabling that. That said, beyond a certain wealth stratum, none of this really winds up applying anyway, so it's less useful to talk about those folks would do.

pandaman 4y ago
It is prudent to analyze behavior that is not constrained by affordability when arguing about desirability. Otherwise you can easily deduce that people (en masse) genuinely like renting, flying couch, industrially processed food, malt liquor, cars that are at least ten years old etc.
droidist2 4y ago
>It isn't necessarily the density itself driving the demand; it's often the reasonableness of, e.g., being able to send a child off to the post office or supermarket to run an errand. Therein lies the rub: Density tends to be a sufficient condition for enabling that. Which is exactly what I said: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31891305 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31891305 Saying "Well if people love their density so much, why don't rich people cram themselves in the tightest possible density" is a strawman.