4 ms·

I have the solution but it will require massive government investment and oversight. Incentivize construction and cutting red tape to mass produce housing of a

I have the solution but it will require massive government investment and oversight. Incentivize construction and cutting red tape to mass produce housing of a few million houses a year. This will hurt property owners but will open up affordability. How it will work you all can argue

robocat 4y ago
Without care it could easily end up with some people owning multiple properties, or even just leaving properties empty…
piva00 4y ago
It's not like it hasn't been done before in history and we don't know it works, just look at the Swedish Miljonprogrammet from the 60-70s [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Million_Programme https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Million_Programme
dirtyid 4y ago
I think for high demand urban centres/markets, this is just going to lead to Braess's paradox of more roads = more cars = more traffic. More units = more people = more opporunities = maybe even higher rent. Unless there's ridiculous amount of oversupply. Perhaps greater NYC needs 60 million units to stablize price for 59M people that want to move there to reach the demand equilibirum of a overcrowded megacity 3x population of the current state. Gov needs to keep building units to put supply ahead of demand until until an urban centre becomes undesirable and people stop coming. Soon, ecumenopolis. E: over comment limit @Eisenstein They're not. I'm a fan of them. Like JP mega cities are relatively affordable with greater Tokyo having "reasonably" 22M people. But for US/west, highly desirable cities + high immigration, cities like NYC, I think has capacity draw/support people that push past what's stustainable based on regional geographic ceiling. NYC's already depend on stupidenous water transport infra. I feel (based on no evidence in particular) that NYC would grow to 40M people and run out of water, but rent stays the same/if not higher because there's even more opportunties and 80M people wants to move there.
- Eisenstein 4y ago
  Mega cities aren't really a bad idea. Less sprawl and more population density is a great solution to overuse of recourses devoted to moving people and things around.

robocat 4y ago

Without care it could easily end up with some people owning multiple properties, or even just leaving properties empty…

piva00 4y ago

It's not like it hasn't been done before in history and we don't know it works, just look at the Swedish Miljonprogrammet from the 60-70s [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Million_Programme https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Million_Programme

dirtyid 4y ago

I think for high demand urban centres/markets, this is just going to lead to Braess's paradox of more roads = more cars = more traffic. More units = more people = more opporunities = maybe even higher rent. Unless there's ridiculous amount of oversupply. Perhaps greater NYC needs 60 million units to stablize price for 59M people that want to move there to reach the demand equilibirum of a overcrowded megacity 3x population of the current state. Gov needs to keep building units to put supply ahead of demand until until an urban centre becomes undesirable and people stop coming. Soon, ecumenopolis. E: over comment limit @Eisenstein They're not. I'm a fan of them. Like JP mega cities are relatively affordable with greater Tokyo having "reasonably" 22M people. But for US/west, highly desirable cities + high immigration, cities like NYC, I think has capacity draw/support people that push past what's stustainable based on regional geographic ceiling. NYC's already depend on stupidenous water transport infra. I feel (based on no evidence in particular) that NYC would grow to 40M people and run out of water, but rent stays the same/if not higher because there's even more opportunties and 80M people wants to move there.

Eisenstein 4y ago
Mega cities aren't really a bad idea. Less sprawl and more population density is a great solution to overuse of recourses devoted to moving people and things around.