3 ms·
> The main hurdle to overcome is finding the politicians you'd need to take power from property owners to give to non-owner residents The opposite is true. We
by dionidium 3y ago
> The main hurdle to overcome is finding the politicians you'd need to take power from property owners to give to non-owner residents
The opposite is true. We need to overturn Euclid and similar rulings that took rights away from individual property owners. Property owners should be allowed to build housing on their own land. There is no legitimate public interest in preventing it (beyond banal, ordinary preferences that are better expressed in a market) and an immense public interest in allowing it.
You get rid of the veto point by restoring property rights, not by further limiting them.
- arrosenberg 3y agoThis might work if you put a hard cap on how much property any entity can own individually or by proxy. Otherwise Blackstone, et al. will build the cheapest apartment blocks they can everywhere and lock average Americans out of ownership until the revolution comes.
- ZoomerCretin 3y agoHomeownership only has value because it's effectively (buy-in) rent control. Without rent being too expensive, there's no real need for homeownership. It's actually a negative when you consider reduced mobility and the cost of selling.
- lotsoweiners 3y ago> It's actually a negative when you consider reduced mobility and the cost of selling. A lot of us homeowners enjoy the things you described here. I want to live in a neighborhood with people who have lived here 5-10+ years. The last thing I want is for my family to be amongst a transient population who have no vested interest in their neighborhood.