3 ms·
Unfortunately anything the city does to make an area more desirable is inevitably followed by increased rents.
by okasaki 3y ago
Unfortunately anything the city does to make an area more desirable is inevitably followed by increased rents.
- couchand 3y agoAgain, though, what's the sustainable response? It's not cash transfers, it's community owned housing, land trusts, and the like.
- junofan 3y agoDon’t land trusts just lock people out of their home equity? Since we’ve rigged the housing market to be up-only and the main source of household wealth, it’s probably best for New Yorkers to build lots and lots of normal homes that people can buy and not mess around with failed models from the Jim Crow era that locked black people out of wealth.
- School-Cotton 3y agoHow have we “rigged the housing market to be up-only” ?
- polygamous_bat 3y agoBy ensuring demand keeps going up (population grows) while supply doesn’t (building restrictions, restrictive zoning, NIMBYism). Econ 101.
- ethanbond 3y agoLVT. There’s a reason the law that GP states, that all public investment is eventually baked into rents, is called the Henry George Theorem. There’s no way around this, but with LVT at least society captures the returns on its investments instead of private landowners, which can then be reinvested e.g. in nicer public housing or public transit that allows a larger geographic area to participate in city life.
- thelastgallon 3y agoIn Bay Area, if you can see a tree from the window the rent is more. If it’s a scenic view, the rent is a lot more. Rent is gamification donee right, mandatory in-app purchases.
- onlyrealcuzzo 3y agoRents only go up if more people want to live somewhere or can afford more to live there - or, maybe short-term, if the government levies more taxes. If you make everywhere nice, then you don't need to pay a premium to live somewhere nice. Maybe you have to pay a miniscule amount more in property taxes. You could just stop running trash & sewer service and let the city turn to garbage if you want lower rents. I don't think that's what people want. They want somewhere nice to live. You can't have your cake and eat it, too.
- onlyrealcuzzo 3y agoI will add that I'm being naive here thinking that EVERYWHERE in the US would do anything, let alone invest in trees, of all things... On a city level, if - say - Chicagoland invested in all of its neighborhoods being beautiful instead of mainly just the wealthy areas near the lake - then you might have more people than expected migrate to the area and drive up rents everywhere, slightly. But I'm skeptical... As much as people like a nice neighborhood, you pick where you live (your metro) mostly based on jobs and your life - not trees. You pick your individual neighborhood that metro based on a ton of factors. Trees could definitely influence that. If trees are everywhere in that matro, then it's a non-factor.
- tptacek 3y agoChicago's non-lakefront neighborhoods are famously beautiful? Even the boarded up neighborhoods are tree canopy streets and Queen Annes? And who lives on the Lakefront? The most expensive houses in Chicago are generally not close to the lake.
- mFixman 3y agoIf migration is the only reason rents increase, why have they been increasing everywhere?
- panick21_ 3y agoLets just destroy all public infrastructure. Then rents will be so low.