Why should people who live in a place be squeezed to death so that “in theory” transplants would have an easier time moving to a city? Which I don’t think you care about immigrants at all, I think you care about the profits of landlords first and foremost
They shouldn't? They should be able to live in the broadly abundant housing that should exist, too? If you build enough housing then the people getting squeezed are the landlords!
Answer the kids question please You are able to feign self righteousness because you get to imagine all of the people you dislike are morally flawed Instead of normal people
When I first moved to Portland a decade ago I rented a room in a house for a couple hundred bucks and made about $25k as a SAT tutor until I got a better job- which was still $45k. I was not a rich yuppie moving to town. Most people aren't! They're Xavier/Yvonne's kids who were forced to move away!
The government can build more housing as needed, it’s not like population growth isn’t a predictable thing lmao
bsky.app/profile/redo...
It is exponentially more expensive and difficult to build the amount of housing we need with public development alone than it would be to just make it easier for private developers to build I'm sorry. You are clueless on this issue
"providing healthcare to everyone is too expensive, we need to let the free market do it, please ignore all the people who can't afford it"
1) private developers can build at $/sqft much cheaper than governments can. This is simply a fact. Building enough housing to address the CA crisis would double the state's budget 2) the proper analogy is increasing the supply of doctors and nurses by removing unnecessary barriers put in place
By private interest groups to artificially reduce supply to keep wages high. This would indeed bring Healthcare costs down and is, in fact, often a component of many socialized Healthcare systems around the world
do you not see a difference between a doctor, who does an actual service, and a landlord, who does nothing other than take money for sitting on their ass all day and then takes more money every year?
The analogue of the doctor, in this comparison, is not the landlord It is the housing unit
by paying substandard wages and using the worst possible materials as cheaply as possible lol, I've lived in "luxury" apartments that were "renovated" low income housing
That is one reason, yes; the causes are manifold Also govt housing tends to go with the lowest bidder anyway, so...
Ah yes where have I heard that the free market will fix things and that the wealth will trickle down before
This is empirically observable and has been proven time and again in real world scenarios If a new luxury tower opens up it exerts an observable downward pressure on rents as people who can afford it leave their older, less nice units for the shiny newness, freeing them up. This happens!
Wealthy people hoard money. They don't hoard housing units for no reason. Again, this is something we observe time and again in real world scenarios
“Wealthy people don’t hoard housing” That’s literally what a landlord is lmao
By hoarding housing, I mean "owning multiple units for your own living purposes" If you are renting out a property you own, that's not the same thing
The only way new housing opening up doesn't lead to downward filtering as people vacate cheaper, older units for newer ones is if they *also* retain their older unit and it doesn't get rented out
that is entirely the same thing lmao
In one, a unit is getting rented out. In another, it is remaining vacant Those are only the same things if you're an idiot
"no you see in one scenario a rich person sits on something to hoard value, and in the other scenario, a rich person sits on something to hoard value, it's very different"
Yes it is in fact very different when discussing housing prices in an area if a unit is being leased out or held vacant You are nowhere near as informed on this topic to warrant this level of smugness