3 ms·
> Why not let those without homes choose if they are willing to take the risks associated with ignoring those rules over l king on the streets? I'd rather have
by silicon2401 4y ago
> Why not let those without homes choose if they are willing to take the risks associated with ignoring those rules over l king on the streets?
I'd rather have a government that enforces a high quality of life.
- ethbr0 4y agoAs would we all, but we have to be cognizant that enforcing a high quality of life also means ignoring people who can't afford the raised minimum. By and large, I'm a fan of American-style freedom-to-succeed-or-fail, but in the context of NIMBY anti-density housing supply crunches, it feels exceptionally cruel. 'We're going to have policies that limit supply and increase the cost of housing' + 'We're going to prevent you from finding other housing by making it illegal' is a heavy one-two punch.
- lghh 4y agoSure, but if the choice is this in the immediate term vs "a government that enforces a high quality of life" in the maybe-but-not-for-certain long term, I'd much rather take steps in that direction instead of waiting for some mythical perfect situation to present itself.
- trcarney 4y agoOr maybe it's government involvement that has caused the whole issue in the first place and more government involvement would lead to an even bigger problem.