11–20 of 185 posts
> We need a more sophisticated understanding of these problems, so we can have more sophisticated conversations about what to do about them. This should be pasted liberally across the internet
It strikes me that new anything is usually better than older, used things. So almost by definition, anyone building a new version of X is going to build something nicer than the old, used versions of X and this will be perceived as a luxury. Sure there are edge cases like nice antiques and the building where they filmed Downton Abbey but for the most part older stuff is just less nice.
I can't fathom the logic behind the idea that we'll get people to build brand new housing to a high spec and sell it for less than existing, very expensive housing. Every time anyone builds stuff near me there's cries of "BUT IT'S NOT AFFORDABLE!!!" and I just think... duh? New cars are expensive too, which is why you buy a used one....
There's a great reddit thread exploring much the same issues at https://www.reddit.com/r/LosAngeles/comments/6lvwh4/im_an_ar... Turns out, requiring little houses for cars be added on to every house for people gets expensive.
There's a great reddit thread exploring much the same issues at https://www.reddit.com/r/LosAngeles/comments/6lvwh4/im_an_ar... Turns out, requiring little houses for cars be added on to every house for people gets expensive.
Unsurprisingly, whether it’s public housing or public transportation, there really is no way around investing in public infrastructure if you want to have a healthy society.
There's a great reddit thread exploring much the same issues at https://www.reddit.com/r/LosAngeles/comments/6lvwh4/im_an_ar... Turns out, requiring little houses for cars be added on to every house for people gets expensive.
Quality of life is expensive, doesn't mean it's not worth it. Not that there shouldn't be some allowances for denser apartment buildings.
Now after all of these fix costs would I rather build luxury units that net me tons of money or affordable units that net me little money? And also the neighborhood itself is opposed to a lot of low-income housing for all sorts of class reasons. It’s just not in any stakeholder interest.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Toyota makes a new camry as well as a new lexus.
The point he's trying to make is that a new house often costs less than a used house, which is the opposite in the car market.
There's a great reddit thread exploring much the same issues at https://www.reddit.com/r/LosAngeles/comments/6lvwh4/im_an_ar... Turns out, requiring little houses for cars be added on to every house for people gets expensive.
It strikes me that new anything is usually better than older, used things. So almost by definition, anyone building a new version of X is going to build something nicer than the old, used versions of X and this will be perceived as a luxury. Sure there are edge cases like nice antiques and the building where they filmed Downton Abbey but for the most part older stuff is just less nice.
In the UK new-builds are seen as the worst option. Most people want a house from the 20s or 30s if they can. Every decade beyond that the quality of housing got worse and worse and worse. These days buying a new house is a desperate option for people who can’t afford anything else.