31–40 of 194 posts
Everyone and their cat wants to live as close as humanly possible to the hip center of the hip city. But of course, they literally do not want to pay the price. Why is there a vegan bakery specialized in Afghan Bagel[1] around the corner? Because there are enough hip, young professionals to pay for even the most unlikely specialty. Business can afford to cater to the most extraordinary taste, but only because there a…
Everyone and their cat wants to live as close as humanly possible to the hip center of the hip city. But of course, they literally do not want to pay the price. Why is there a vegan bakery specialized in Afghan Bagel[1] around the corner? Because there are enough hip, young professionals to pay for even the most unlikely specialty. Business can afford to cater to the most extraordinary taste, but only because there a…
> Due to the limits of public transportation Fix this. People live within n time of where they want to be. If people can travel faster then the space within n time can be greater. This is the key to Tokyo and other very large metropolis cities. Have public transport offer high speed and frequent rail routes, and then many local solutions from cycling, walking, buses, trams.
But they also live in small apartments and homes. I'm not convinced that Tokyo is a good example here.
The key to this problem is to have jobs in places that aren't large urban centers. This way the population spreads out and housing becomes more affordable.
There is no need to put a hard limit, just an effective limit by having a general wealth tax. Money flows to where money already is, that's inevitable in a capitalist market economy. There's no need to change that, but progressively bigger piles of wealth should be progressively higher taxed to keep them in check, thus ensuring a competitive market. Edit: I guess I should have known mentioning wealth tax would get pe…
Taxing general wealth would be enough if you just wanted money. But what you want is rather change in the behaviour of the wealthy. You want them to take away their money out of real estate market so that it does not inflate the prices. You could achieve that through progressive real estate tax. This would make holding and renting large amounts of real estate less profitable in comparison to other things rich invest…
It's an effective way to encourage development of more housing, and reclaim some of the costs associated with rising demand for real estate.
Yes, housing is a right not a speculation opportunity. Also there should be opportunities for people to get their own houses, like cheap credits with a monthly payment close to the rent.
Let's say I agree with this idea and let's also ignore the fact that by stating it's a right, we are implicitly stating that someone else needs to pay for it with their own money if you cannot.
If housing is a right, does that necessarily mean that housing in a specific area is a right? I mean, I'd love a beachfront property in Maui but we can't all have that.
If we build a few million houses in the middle of Kansas and tell people "there is your free house, as is your right", is that enough? Or do people have a right to a free house somewhere just because someone in their family happened to be lucky enough to live in the same general area at some point in the past?
People in the US are generally allowed to move where they want. If a place becomes too expensive for them to live there, it's possible for them to move elsewhere if they must. I can definitely see that offering help with relocation could be good for society, and I can also see that having a mix of different people in an area is also good for society, but ultimately I don't agree that just because someone happened to pay rent at some point in the past, they and their descendants should be granted a perpetual right to stay in that proximate location forever.
Everyone and their cat wants to live as close as humanly possible to the hip center of the hip city. But of course, they literally do not want to pay the price. Why is there a vegan bakery specialized in Afghan Bagel[1] around the corner? Because there are enough hip, young professionals to pay for even the most unlikely specialty. Business can afford to cater to the most extraordinary taste, but only because there a…
Or make more hip city centers.
Ambitious people want to live as close to as many other ambitious people as possible. So wherever the density of these 'Hipsters' or 'Cool People' increases, the desirability of the area increases. And by law of supply and demand, prices go up.
The willingness and ability to pay higher rent decides who can live in those 'cool areas'.
Now the 'cool people' might say to the landlords: "Hey, it's US who make this area cool! Not your houses! Why do we have to pay you for it?".
It's an interesting point. Is it fair? I am not sure. Maybe. The same argument could hold for Facebook, YouTube or Reddit. It's the users that create all the value. Yet the platform providers extract most of it.
I think that before we can form an opinion on different types of regulation, we should ask: If not willingness and ability to pay rent decides who lives where - what or who will decide instead? And what will be the result?
Everyone and their cat wants to live as close as humanly possible to the hip center of the hip city. But of course, they literally do not want to pay the price. Why is there a vegan bakery specialized in Afghan Bagel[1] around the corner? Because there are enough hip, young professionals to pay for even the most unlikely specialty. Business can afford to cater to the most extraordinary taste, but only because there a…
> Due to the limits of public transportation Fix this. People live within n time of where they want to be. If people can travel faster then the space within n time can be greater. This is the key to Tokyo and other very large metropolis cities. Have public transport offer high speed and frequent rail routes, and then many local solutions from cycling, walking, buses, trams.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Due to the limits of public transportation Fix this. People live within n time of where they want to be. If people can travel faster then the space within n time can be greater. This is the key to Tokyo and other very large metropolis cities. Have public transport offer high speed and frequent rail routes, and then many local solutions from cycling, walking, buses, trams.
> This is the key to Tokyo and other very large metropolis cities. But they also live in small apartments and homes. I'm not convinced that Tokyo is a good example here. The key to this problem is to have jobs in places that aren't large urban centers. This way the population spreads out and housing becomes more affordable.
A better way may be to create new urban centers or develop lesser ones.