3 ms·
I think that's a common misconception. If you dig into those numbers you'll probably find a regulatory burden that is not actually gone, massive local pushback
by jamestimmins 4y ago
I think that's a common misconception. If you dig into those numbers you'll probably find a regulatory burden that is not actually gone, massive local pushback on development, or a cost structure that still doesn't work.
California refuses to learn the lesson that throwing money at a problem doesn't just mean it's fixed (see: the high speed rail).
- miguelazo 4y agoObviously money alone won't solve the problem. But when 95%+ of the proposals are NOT affordable housing, and those developers are actively bribing city officials, it's no surprise that most of what gets built are luxury condos, mostly downtown, the vast majority of which are uninhabited, serving as bank accounts for foreign "investors." https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-01-19/jose-huizar-agrees-to-plead-guilty https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-01-19/jose-hui...
- jamestimmins 4y agoDo you have data to back up your claim that the vast majority of new LA condo development is uninhabited and going to foreign investors?
- miguelazo 4y agoYeah, try taking a drive downtown after dark in any major city. See how many of the new units have lights on. Do that night after night, random times. Most are dark. Local/state governments don't actually collect data on this because they're in the pockets of real estate. Vancouver BC had the exact same problem, so they passed a massive vacancy tax, something California needs to implement ASAP.