8 ms·

> I think it's ok to have to choose between renting in Toronto and eating dinner. Hard disagree on this part, it's a short-sighted take. Do you want to live i

> I think it's ok to have to choose between renting in Toronto and eating dinner. Hard disagree on this part, it's a short-sighted take. Do you want to live in a city which might effectively kick you out when you're 70, cost of living has gone up and your income has gone down? What's the collateral damage done by this sort of policy? Loneliness in old age is already epidemic in advanced countries - I can't imagine a more effective way to make it worse than asking someone to uproot at that point. We can disagree on the manner and degree of support or reform, the implementation etc. but my point is a city which doesn't try to address this is actually a pretty shitty city for everyone. It's a shitty place to put down roots. The fact that a small number of cities have so much economic gravity in the modern era is bad economic policy. It's antidemocratic and highly correlated with wealth inequality. These cities suck in thousands of people from other cities because they've got all the jobs, and then tell those people they can't live there anymore when their career is over. This is inhumane, it's a problem which will affect all of us as we age and it should be addressed.

lmm 3y ago
> Do you want to live in a city which might effectively kick you out when you're 70, cost of living has gone up and your income has gone down? What's the collateral damage done by this sort of policy? What's the collateral damage done by not having it? When we rent-control that money is coming from somewhere. > It's antidemocratic and highly correlated with wealth inequality. It's particularly antidemocratic because so many of the people working there can't afford to live there. Plenty of people already can't afford to live in Toronto, wouldn't be able to afford to eat if they moved there. But somehow those people don't get to make it someone else's problem.
- safety1st 3y ago
  Is rent control the only solution here? Why not build more housing? Build out and up until the price goes down. Long term I think the solution is to figure out how to structure the national economy so it isn't dominated by just a few cities. This was not always the case and doesn't have to be a given. If the economy itself is less centralized and monopolized the cities will evolve as well.
  - lmm 3y ago
    > Is rent control the only solution here? Why not build more housing? Build out and up until the price goes down. Exactly. At the risk of being accelerationist, rent control is an anti-solution - it prevents the generation with the most political power from feeling the pain, and also removes some of the profit motive to actually fix the problem. > Long term I think the solution is to figure out how to structure the national economy so it isn't dominated by just a few cities. This was not always the case and doesn't have to be a given. If the economy itself is less centralized and monopolized the cities will evolve as well. The main way to avoid it being dominated by a few cities is to give them some competition, by allowing other cities to grow to compete. But unfortunately that hits the same problem of it being functionally illegal to build anything anywhere people want to live.

lmm 3y ago

> Do you want to live in a city which might effectively kick you out when you're 70, cost of living has gone up and your income has gone down? What's the collateral damage done by this sort of policy? What's the collateral damage done by not having it? When we rent-control that money is coming from somewhere. > It's antidemocratic and highly correlated with wealth inequality. It's particularly antidemocratic because so many of the people working there can't afford to live there. Plenty of people already can't afford to live in Toronto, wouldn't be able to afford to eat if they moved there. But somehow those people don't get to make it someone else's problem.

safety1st 3y ago
Is rent control the only solution here? Why not build more housing? Build out and up until the price goes down. Long term I think the solution is to figure out how to structure the national economy so it isn't dominated by just a few cities. This was not always the case and doesn't have to be a given. If the economy itself is less centralized and monopolized the cities will evolve as well.
- lmm 3y ago
  > Is rent control the only solution here? Why not build more housing? Build out and up until the price goes down. Exactly. At the risk of being accelerationist, rent control is an anti-solution - it prevents the generation with the most political power from feeling the pain, and also removes some of the profit motive to actually fix the problem. > Long term I think the solution is to figure out how to structure the national economy so it isn't dominated by just a few cities. This was not always the case and doesn't have to be a given. If the economy itself is less centralized and monopolized the cities will evolve as well. The main way to avoid it being dominated by a few cities is to give them some competition, by allowing other cities to grow to compete. But unfortunately that hits the same problem of it being functionally illegal to build anything anywhere people want to live.