4 ms·

"Feed the hungry. House the homeless" Funnel $10B in housing to Los Angeles and you'll build less than 100 units of housing, because the inflationary push of t

"Feed the hungry. House the homeless" Funnel $10B in housing to Los Angeles and you'll build less than 100 units of housing, because the inflationary push of that money would balloon the cost of per unit housing. I don't want to imagine the effect of that on middle class housing. Funnel $10B of food to xyz famine region and you've undercut local farmers for generations. Happens all the time [1]. And that's assuming you can get the aid past local corruption. These problems aren't as simple as people assume, and I'm low-key happy young naive Billionaire's are avoiding these issues instead of trying to throw their weight around. FWIW: Sam's already funneled a bunch of money into green energy production[2]. [1]: https://haitisolidarity.net/in-the-news/how-the-united-states-crippled-haitis-domestic-rice-industry/ https://haitisolidarity.net/in-the-news/how-the-united-state... [2]: https://www.cnbc.com/2024/09/25/sam-altman-backed-nuclear-startup-oklo-to-start-site-work-for-idaho-microreactor.html https://www.cnbc.com/2024/09/25/sam-altman-backed-nuclear-st...

exceptione 2y ago
> Funnel $10B in housing to Los Angeles and you'll build less than 100 units of housing, because the inflationary push of that money would balloon the cost of per unit housing. I don't want to imagine the effect of that on middle class housing. Doesn't make sense to me. An uptick in construction work will not be an inflation balloon. More disposable income doesn't mean 1:1 more spending. If you build a lot of (social) housing, you put at worst a lot of people a roof above their head. Families having less financial stress might lower crime rate and improve children school scores. They might save to start businesses or find their other talents. For some, this might be a downside tough. It makes workers more educated, healthier, more stable, less desperate and less dependent on bosses, plus they might be less angry so politically less exploitable too.
- pj_mukh 2y ago
  "An uptick in construction work will not be an inflation balloon. " There's a massive shortage in construction workers [1], so yes there will be? The few construction workers we do have can demand higher wages (yay!) but then will they be outbidding other mid-income folks for housing with those increased wages? Sounds like an inflation spiral to me. My statement wasn't against social housing, I love social housing. We just haven't cracked the code in scaling housing (and subsequent maintenance) yet. And the problem is about 80% political will, billionaire cash is useless here. [1]: https://www.abc.org/News-Media/News-Releases/abc-2024-construction-workforce-shortage-tops-half-a-million https://www.abc.org/News-Media/News-Releases/abc-2024-constr...
  - exceptione 2y ago
    On a macro scale, that has hardly any impact, and I think it would be even immeasurable. It is rather the other way around. Higher rents / house prices will make sure only people with higher wages can afford to live there. That means your bagel or coffee will be more expensive there too.
    - pj_mukh 2y ago
      I didn’t say macro scale, I said Los Angeles that’s the problem. Pretty much everything required to build housing, wood, labor, pre-approved land is in a massive shortage that we can’t spend money to fix. So more money to simple pump demand for all those things will have a massive inflationary impact.
      - exceptione 2y ago
        Nope, LA is too much part of the macro economy to make such an impact. Wood and labor doesn't have to come from LA and even if that would double (it won't) there would be a round zero impact on inflation in LA. The land to be build was going to be sold anyways, you just get one bidder more, or several bidders less if the council makes requirements like x% social housing. Please, forget anything you are worrying about here, it does not apply.
        pj_mukh 2y ago
        Literally every problem I mentioned is at its worst state possible. People with millions and billions simply waiting to buy materials or get land approvals. It’s a well know intractable problem [1] and really the crux of the problem. If just these problems could be solved the state has more than enough funds to house everyone. What billionaires do would be wholly irrelevant (like it is now) [1] https://www.constructiondive.com/news/construction-materials-supply-chain-shortage/708866/ https://www.constructiondive.com/news/construction-materials...
latexr 2y ago
I didn’t say “do these things inefficiently”. If we know better, we can do better. It’s like if I said “use the money to fix the potholes in this road” and you replied “but if you shove all that asphalt in the same hole, it will create a mound that stops cars from going through”. Yeah, don’t dump everything in the same place without thinking. Start by collaborating with organisations which are entrenched in studying these issues and the impact of the solutions. If you have the money you can pay them to help and guide the effort, don’t act like if you know everything.
- pj_mukh 2y ago
  Yes this has basically been the modus operandi of the gates foundation and it took them 10 years to make a dent on Malaria. They still have no clue how to “efficiently” reduce famines. They won’t touch American housing problems with a 10ft pole. That should tell you something. Go to Berkeley, tell them a Billionaire wants to build housing for the homeless in their neighborhood. See what happens. It’s a hard pill to swallow but the best thing billionaires can do is let us tax them and then butt out go fly rockets. The political problems is upto the rest of us.
  - exceptione 2y ago
    The housing problem in the USA is mostly a NIMBY. It is difficult to get projects from the ground.
  - latexr 2y ago
    > They won’t touch American housing problems with a 10ft pole. Why do you keep insisting on the USA? It’s not the only country in the world. > Go to Berkeley I will not. I’m not American. > It’s a hard pill to swallow but the best thing billionaires can do is let us tax them Maybe it’s a hard pill to swallow for the billionaire, but I personally agree and think you’re right. However, this conversation started with someone asking “what do you do with a a lot of money past a point” and offering only a private space agency as an alternative to working on AGI. My point was there are many other problems worth pursuing.
    - 2y ago

exceptione 2y ago

> Funnel $10B in housing to Los Angeles and you'll build less than 100 units of housing, because the inflationary push of that money would balloon the cost of per unit housing. I don't want to imagine the effect of that on middle class housing. Doesn't make sense to me. An uptick in construction work will not be an inflation balloon. More disposable income doesn't mean 1:1 more spending. If you build a lot of (social) housing, you put at worst a lot of people a roof above their head. Families having less financial stress might lower crime rate and improve children school scores. They might save to start businesses or find their other talents. For some, this might be a downside tough. It makes workers more educated, healthier, more stable, less desperate and less dependent on bosses, plus they might be less angry so politically less exploitable too.

pj_mukh 2y ago
"An uptick in construction work will not be an inflation balloon. " There's a massive shortage in construction workers [1], so yes there will be? The few construction workers we do have can demand higher wages (yay!) but then will they be outbidding other mid-income folks for housing with those increased wages? Sounds like an inflation spiral to me. My statement wasn't against social housing, I love social housing. We just haven't cracked the code in scaling housing (and subsequent maintenance) yet. And the problem is about 80% political will, billionaire cash is useless here. [1]: https://www.abc.org/News-Media/News-Releases/abc-2024-construction-workforce-shortage-tops-half-a-million https://www.abc.org/News-Media/News-Releases/abc-2024-constr...
- exceptione 2y ago
  On a macro scale, that has hardly any impact, and I think it would be even immeasurable. It is rather the other way around. Higher rents / house prices will make sure only people with higher wages can afford to live there. That means your bagel or coffee will be more expensive there too.
  - pj_mukh 2y ago
    I didn’t say macro scale, I said Los Angeles that’s the problem. Pretty much everything required to build housing, wood, labor, pre-approved land is in a massive shortage that we can’t spend money to fix. So more money to simple pump demand for all those things will have a massive inflationary impact.
    - exceptione 2y ago
      Nope, LA is too much part of the macro economy to make such an impact. Wood and labor doesn't have to come from LA and even if that would double (it won't) there would be a round zero impact on inflation in LA. The land to be build was going to be sold anyways, you just get one bidder more, or several bidders less if the council makes requirements like x% social housing. Please, forget anything you are worrying about here, it does not apply.
      - pj_mukh 2y ago
        Literally every problem I mentioned is at its worst state possible. People with millions and billions simply waiting to buy materials or get land approvals. It’s a well know intractable problem [1] and really the crux of the problem. If just these problems could be solved the state has more than enough funds to house everyone. What billionaires do would be wholly irrelevant (like it is now) [1] https://www.constructiondive.com/news/construction-materials-supply-chain-shortage/708866/ https://www.constructiondive.com/news/construction-materials...

latexr 2y ago

I didn’t say “do these things inefficiently”. If we know better, we can do better. It’s like if I said “use the money to fix the potholes in this road” and you replied “but if you shove all that asphalt in the same hole, it will create a mound that stops cars from going through”. Yeah, don’t dump everything in the same place without thinking. Start by collaborating with organisations which are entrenched in studying these issues and the impact of the solutions. If you have the money you can pay them to help and guide the effort, don’t act like if you know everything.

pj_mukh 2y ago
Yes this has basically been the modus operandi of the gates foundation and it took them 10 years to make a dent on Malaria. They still have no clue how to “efficiently” reduce famines. They won’t touch American housing problems with a 10ft pole. That should tell you something. Go to Berkeley, tell them a Billionaire wants to build housing for the homeless in their neighborhood. See what happens. It’s a hard pill to swallow but the best thing billionaires can do is let us tax them and then butt out go fly rockets. The political problems is upto the rest of us.
- exceptione 2y ago
  The housing problem in the USA is mostly a NIMBY. It is difficult to get projects from the ground.
- latexr 2y ago
  > They won’t touch American housing problems with a 10ft pole. Why do you keep insisting on the USA? It’s not the only country in the world. > Go to Berkeley I will not. I’m not American. > It’s a hard pill to swallow but the best thing billionaires can do is let us tax them Maybe it’s a hard pill to swallow for the billionaire, but I personally agree and think you’re right. However, this conversation started with someone asking “what do you do with a a lot of money past a point” and offering only a private space agency as an alternative to working on AGI. My point was there are many other problems worth pursuing.
  - 2y ago