3 ms·
> gigantic corporate owned Well, there is your problem. The lack of housing gets solved by, gasp, adding more housing. A house in a city is luxury, the only w
by Izikiel43 3y ago
> gigantic corporate owned
Well, there is your problem.
The lack of housing gets solved by, gasp, adding more housing. A house in a city is luxury, the only way to keep rents down is by adding more to the offer, and guess what, apartment buildings add a lot of housing in a small surface.
Corporations are bound by economics, they can't charge out of bounds rents if the average rent price is much lower, and you get that by, you guessed it, building more.
> We need a mix of housing
No, you need a ton more housing, not a mix, you have to aim for efficiency here, specially in cities. Having a SFH in a city is a luxury, townhome I would say is above average, and everyone else should be in apartments. Apartments don't have to be ugly, if I could I would buy a 2/3 bedroom apartment, however there isn't much offer, and everything is from ages ago because the USA doesn't build.
- happytiger 3y agoI’m down for a ton more housing in any form so I won’t disagree with you. I want to see better lives for people in whatever capacity they want to make it honestly. I don’t think it’s an OR situation but I don’t think counterpointing is going to help the conversation any. You’re not wrong. I just think we also need to do things like actually build new cities instead of just adding more and more to existing ones. That’s a formula that we used to have that has just stopped completely happening and now it actually worked. But more housing and better lives for people is the point so I’ll leave it there.