7 ms·
Surely, we need more government regulations and programs not less. Removing zoning laws can't possibly be the solution. Maybe we can have the government give
by nsnick 12y ago
Surely, we need more government regulations and programs not less. Removing zoning laws can't possibly be the solution. Maybe we can have the government give housing to poor families, thereby taking housing stock off the market and reducing supply.
- serge2k 12y agoRevamping zoning laws probably is the solution. Make it easier to build more housing.
- tlrobinson 12y agoI think the parent commenter was being sarcastic and would agree with you.
- nsnick 12y agoThis is hilarious. California is so liberal that people are taking my sarcastic comment literally.
- jcfrei 12y agoWhat always surprises me is that in the US "liberal" means left leaning and pro government intervention. Which is basically the opposite of liberalism.
- dragonwriter 12y ago> What always surprises me is that in the US "liberal" means left leaning and pro government intervention. Which is basically the opposite of liberalism. Politically speaking, "left leaning" and "liberal" are both terms of 18th century origin, referring to the same kind of opponents of the centralized monarchic/oligarchic authority in favor of distribution of power to the people at large based on a conception of inherent rights; they certainly aren't opposite terms. And the modern US liberal/conservative divide is a lot more about the purpose of government intervention than for/against it. (Both liberals and conservatives attack each other over different policies for supporting government control over individual freedom.)
- 1053r 12y agoThis is simple supply and demand. Everyone from liberal economist Paul Krugman [1] to SF board of supervisors member Scott Wiener [2] agrees that California and bay area housing policies are horrible. The only people who actually like these policies are the people who are benefiting from them, typically because they moved to a neighborhood decades ago and are either on rent control or "rent control for property tax" (aka Proposition 13). The solution is simple. Set aside a square mile in each city on the peninsula and zone it such that it is illegal to build a building of less than 10 stories. At the same time, and more importantly, repeal both proposition 13 and rent control statutes. For step 3, sit back and watch the California economy go into turbo drive as there is a massive construction boom, which funnels money away from rich landlords and into the pockets of ordinary construction workers and the service workers that support both them and the engineers the region's wealth is built on. 1 - http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/07/opinion/reckonings-a-rent-affair.html http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/07/opinion/reckonings-a-rent-... 2 - https://medium.com/@Scott_Wiener/yes-supply-demand-apply-to-housing-even-in-san-francisco-193c1b0c190f https://medium.com/@Scott_Wiener/yes-supply-demand-apply-to-...
- refurb 12y agoConsidering how many folks have most of their net worth tied up in a $1.5M 1500 sq. ft. home in the city, there is going to be a TON of resistance to more building. Can you imagine the average price of a home dropping to $700K? Tens of thousands of folks would be underwater on their homes.
- nsnick 12y agoAll of the value in their homes was created by government regulation. Complaining about the price of your home going down because government regulation is removed is like taxi medallion owners complaining about Uber. In both cases government unfairly created the wealth through regulating scarcity.
- Kalium 12y agoThat may be true, but all they see is the value going down.