2 ms·
It seems to me much more about group incentives than some nefarious lockstep plan. Existing homeowners incentives are liking things as they are and increasing w
by reducesuffering 3y ago
It seems to me much more about group incentives than some nefarious lockstep plan. Existing homeowners incentives are liking things as they are and increasing wealth on paper. What’s more interesting is what changed since the ~60s inflection, since before, things were built. People literally experienced NYC grow into a megalopolis. I’d say it’s more likely that more democracy was the problem in stifling things, when every environmental review and city council meeting blocked things and threw out city mayors that were pro building. China is totalitarian and they are the ones who manage to rapidly build cities and bullet trains out of nothing.
- lll-o-lll 3y ago> It seems to me much more about group incentives than some nefarious lockstep plan. Yes, probably, but isn’t this worse? Group incentives favour those that already have capital (material and political), which creates a feedback-loop increasing the rich-poor divide until… what exactly? What’s the end-state? A return to feudalism? Bloody revolution? It just seems like there was a “once upon a time” where politics was about “this is the society we want”, and they tried to build it. Now it seems we’ve all just given up. Meaningless! Meaningless! Let’s deconstruct society until we can argue that a future of 1% home ownership is somehow better.