4 ms·

You gotta look at the motivations. Rich people and activists can both agree that affordable housing requirements are a good thing. The higher the better. This m

You gotta look at the motivations. Rich people and activists can both agree that affordable housing requirements are a good thing. The higher the better. This makes the project not pencil out so everybody is happy - the homeowners who don’t want new neighbors and the activists who think that everything is gentrification. The only people who get screwed are the only people who don’t have a vote, the non-residents. Which is why zoning policy and approvals cannot be locally controlled.

epistasis 4mo ago
I would argue that the people who get screwed the worst are all the people who can barely afford to pay current rent. They get displaced when rents rise, having to move away from their friends, family, their kids' schools, etc. All because "activists" convinced them that their enemies are the people able to pay slightly more, rather than the system that says "only the X wealthiest people can live here, oh and we won't change X even though it's trivial."
- selectodude 4mo ago
  I’m always a bit confused how this is so difficult for people to understand. If I want to move into your neighborhood, there are two options - I move into new construction or I move into your house. There is no option C where I decide that because the housing stock is garbage, I decide to go somewhere else.
  - epistasis 4mo ago
    Here's an academic paper on how many people don't understand housing economics, even though they understand the same concepts in other areas: https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.20241428 https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.20241428 I can't tell you how many times I've been told that "supply and demand doesn't apply to housing," both by super wealthy NIMBY homeowners and by those struggling to get by.
    - win311fwg 4mo ago
      I've heard the same thing about supply and demand many times myself which seemed strange at first, but when I dug deeper I learned they aren't using the traditional definition for supply and demand, so what they were communicating was technically true, if meaningless. They weren't speaking the same language. When I dug even deeper, I discovered that, pretty consistently, they don't understand the concepts anywhere, but their misconceptions sometimes incidentally fit reality, leaving it to appear as though they have an understanding sometimes. Housing is one of those places where those misconceptions don't usually fit and that is where the breakdown really becomes apparent, hence why they see housing as something unique.
      - epistasis 4mo ago
        > but when I dug deeper I learned they aren't using the traditional definition for supply and demand, so what they were communicating was technically true, if meaningless Can you provide some of those definitions that do work? Because I've spent a lot of time talking about this and never been able to come to a shared understanding that also matches the material world.
        win311fwg 4mo ago
        > Can you provide some of those definitions that do work? No. They don't work. That is how they end up so confused.

epistasis 4mo ago

I would argue that the people who get screwed the worst are all the people who can barely afford to pay current rent. They get displaced when rents rise, having to move away from their friends, family, their kids' schools, etc. All because "activists" convinced them that their enemies are the people able to pay slightly more, rather than the system that says "only the X wealthiest people can live here, oh and we won't change X even though it's trivial."

selectodude 4mo ago
I’m always a bit confused how this is so difficult for people to understand. If I want to move into your neighborhood, there are two options - I move into new construction or I move into your house. There is no option C where I decide that because the housing stock is garbage, I decide to go somewhere else.
- epistasis 4mo ago
  Here's an academic paper on how many people don't understand housing economics, even though they understand the same concepts in other areas: https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.20241428 https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.20241428 I can't tell you how many times I've been told that "supply and demand doesn't apply to housing," both by super wealthy NIMBY homeowners and by those struggling to get by.
  - win311fwg 4mo ago
    I've heard the same thing about supply and demand many times myself which seemed strange at first, but when I dug deeper I learned they aren't using the traditional definition for supply and demand, so what they were communicating was technically true, if meaningless. They weren't speaking the same language. When I dug even deeper, I discovered that, pretty consistently, they don't understand the concepts anywhere, but their misconceptions sometimes incidentally fit reality, leaving it to appear as though they have an understanding sometimes. Housing is one of those places where those misconceptions don't usually fit and that is where the breakdown really becomes apparent, hence why they see housing as something unique.
    - epistasis 4mo ago
      > but when I dug deeper I learned they aren't using the traditional definition for supply and demand, so what they were communicating was technically true, if meaningless Can you provide some of those definitions that do work? Because I've spent a lot of time talking about this and never been able to come to a shared understanding that also matches the material world.
      - win311fwg 4mo ago
        > Can you provide some of those definitions that do work? No. They don't work. That is how they end up so confused.