3 ms·
It's socially beneficial for people to A) make the place they live reflect their preferences and B) ensure that the ones who capture the positive social externa
by wyager 4y ago
It's socially beneficial for people to A) make the place they live reflect their preferences and B) ensure that the ones who capture the positive social externalities of an action are the ones who paid for it.
Being able to make rules about how the area you live is used are a fundamental part of both of those.
Fully externalizing the benefits of an action never has positive social outcomes. No one would bother making their neighborhood nice if they thought that as soon as they did, a million people who had nothing to do with making it nice in the first place would move in and screw it up.
- iamwpj 4y ago> a million people who had nothing to do with making it nice in the first place would move in and screw it up So definitely _not_ socially beneficial.
- dyno12345 4y agoObvoiusly one solution could be an internal passport system, where you would need to apply for a visa or residency permit in order to live somewhere.
- wyager 4y agoCertainly, that would work very well, but such a system would almost certainly not be permitted by federal regulators (e.g. HUD) or the courts.