5 ms·

There are 153 million more people in the U.S. today than in 1963. The reason these neighborhoods are exclusive to the wealthy is that housing there is scarce d

There are 153 million more people in the U.S. today than in 1963. The reason these neighborhoods are exclusive to the wealthy is that housing there is scarce despite growing demand due to job growth. Housing in places like the Bay Area is such a big portion of monthly expenses that stuff like Arby's 4 for $10 or whatever isn't whats hurting people the most. Lots of these issues just come down to housing and restrictive zoning.

tonymet 3y ago
95% of zips in 1963 were safe and livable. Now everyone is competing to live in 15% of zipcodes You address the supply side of the "housing crisis", what about demand?
- decremental 3y ago
  [dead]
- ProfessorLayton 3y ago
  >You address the supply side of the "housing crisis" Why the scare quotes especially when no such term was used? >what about demand? "...growing demand due to job growth" <- demand side was indeed mentioned. It's literally illegal to build enough housing in many, many places where jobs are via low height limits, absurd parking requirements, and large setbacks etc.
- bryanlarsen 3y ago
  > 95% of zips in 1963 were safe and livable. 95% of white suburban zips might have been safe and livable, but nowhere close to 95% of all zips.
  - thfuran 3y ago
    Pay no attention to the red lines behind the curtain.
- kibwen 3y ago
  > 95% of zips in 1963 were safe and livable. I've been trying to give your comments the benefit of the doubt, but now it's abundantly clear that you're fundamentally unserious about having a conversation grounded in reality.
- chipgap98 3y ago
  Where are your stats on 95% of zips being safe and livable? How are you defining those?
- zeroonetwothree 3y ago
  This is absurd. Crime is far lower than it was in 1963.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
EasyMark 3y ago
It's also quite expensive partially because of garbage regulations on lot sizes and what can be built. NIMBYism is alive and well.

tonymet 3y ago

95% of zips in 1963 were safe and livable. Now everyone is competing to live in 15% of zipcodes You address the supply side of the "housing crisis", what about demand?

decremental 3y ago
[dead]
ProfessorLayton 3y ago
>You address the supply side of the "housing crisis" Why the scare quotes especially when no such term was used? >what about demand? "...growing demand due to job growth" <- demand side was indeed mentioned. It's literally illegal to build enough housing in many, many places where jobs are via low height limits, absurd parking requirements, and large setbacks etc.
bryanlarsen 3y ago
> 95% of zips in 1963 were safe and livable. 95% of white suburban zips might have been safe and livable, but nowhere close to 95% of all zips.
- thfuran 3y ago
  Pay no attention to the red lines behind the curtain.
kibwen 3y ago
> 95% of zips in 1963 were safe and livable. I've been trying to give your comments the benefit of the doubt, but now it's abundantly clear that you're fundamentally unserious about having a conversation grounded in reality.
chipgap98 3y ago
Where are your stats on 95% of zips being safe and livable? How are you defining those?
zeroonetwothree 3y ago
This is absurd. Crime is far lower than it was in 1963.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

EasyMark 3y ago

It's also quite expensive partially because of garbage regulations on lot sizes and what can be built. NIMBYism is alive and well.