3 ms·
The state builds them, shittons of them. See also: the City of Vienna and it's incredible housing situation. I get incredibly annoyed when I read anglo hottake
by malermeister 4y ago
The state builds them, shittons of them. See also: the City of Vienna and it's incredible housing situation.
I get incredibly annoyed when I read anglo hottakes on housing these days.
It's a solved problem in other parts of the world, but it doesn't fit the market ideology, so it gets ignored.
- dominotw 4y agogood luck convincing property owners that city is going to build 5000 units every year in their neighborhoods. How does vienna defang homeowners from being toxic and selfish.
- malermeister 4y agoAs far as I know, it just ignores them. They can complain all they want, the city is within its rights to build on land it owns.
- legitster 4y agoSo, public housing is also a thing in the US. It has just never taken off at a large scale: - The state does not own much land in US cities. So that means buying existing properties at great expense and demolishing/rebuilding at even greater expense. - The "veto" ability for existing residents to oppose new projects in the US is incredibly strong. Even existing public housing residents will oppose new ones built near them. - Construction costs are unnaturally high in the US for a variety of factors - municipal governments can't seem to get out of their own way when it comes to zoning requirements and etc. For California, they ended up paying $1 million dollars per unit! Much more than they would have just buying existing properties for individuals. I don't think it's a problem of "market ideology". I think it's easier to prescribe it as a general policy failure. Vienna has a set of favorable circumstances that are not easily duplicated to other urban areas, and places like China can just ignore legal rights of their citizens to build whatever they want.