61–70 of 200 posts
I used to think that if average income cannot afford the average home, the market must necessarily correct. I’m wrong about this obviously but I still cannot understand why. I understand that wealthier people have vacation homes, but the only reason for a wealthy person to purchase an additional non-vacation home is to rent it out to someone less wealthy. Since the less wealthy person couldn’t cover the mortgage to b…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I hate how that's phrased. No one is ending single-family housing. That would be a fair complaint, if the word “housing” had been used in place of “zoning”. Single-family zoning is a legal restriction that allows only single-family housing. Ending it is not the same as ending single-family housing . If you are going to complain about phrasing, you should complain about the actual phrasing.
People don't understand that the single family zoning is actually an apartment ban. So even if it's technically correct, it scares a lot of people unnecessarily. Otherwise intelligent people have their brains broken when it comes to discussions about housing. We need to pick words carefully to not confuse.
Until more state laws (ie California’s recent legislation) are passed where density developers can reply “that’s a shame”, NIMBYs rule. NY is gearing up for a similar fight.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/02/11/hochul-faces-uprisi...
I used to think that if average income cannot afford the average home, the market must necessarily correct. I’m wrong about this obviously but I still cannot understand why. I understand that wealthier people have vacation homes, but the only reason for a wealthy person to purchase an additional non-vacation home is to rent it out to someone less wealthy. Since the less wealthy person couldn’t cover the mortgage to b…
I have this theory (I wish I could think of a way to easily prove it right with some kind of cherry-picked statistics/data but I'm not confident I'd be able to) that we've finally reached a point (I'm sure it isn't the first time in history but I don't know a lot of history) in "late-stage capitalism" that the top 20% don't mind paying/can pay/will pay/are willing to pay/compete with each other to the point where the bottom 80% can't keep up.
My source is, I tried to buy a house semi-recently. All of the typical stuff you read. Lots of demand/competition. Middle class stuff. The houses sold for what it sold for because that's what people are willing to pay.
Whether it's because the couple who won the bid had bought a $300k house 10 years ago and it doubled and they had $300k extra in funny money equity fall out of the sky is almost irrelevant because it puts them in that "20%" category. Once you are in that category (in my mind), things like "I should drive a Corollla to be efficient" go out the window when every stop light is people who can comfortably afford $80k BMWs without blinking an eye. "Who would pay that?! You can get a good used car for $20k! Blasphemy"
I see it like this:
If a house is priced for $600k but your gut (bias based on historical data) says "it was just $400k not too long ago, it should be worth $400k! this is madness", but then the market moves on and leaves you in the dust (and that $600k house goes from $600k to $700k and beyond), it's just upper middle class people paying (hopefully) what they can afford/are willing to pay.
I used to think that if average income cannot afford the average home, the market must necessarily correct. I’m wrong about this obviously but I still cannot understand why. I understand that wealthier people have vacation homes, but the only reason for a wealthy person to purchase an additional non-vacation home is to rent it out to someone less wealthy. Since the less wealthy person couldn’t cover the mortgage to b…
Make it possible to build more then the market should eventually correct, but the financial squeeze will continue until the market has plenty of supply as often referred to by economists as market clearance such that demand is saturated at all levels.
If they'd locate the jobs to smaller cities and towns we wouldn't have this argument.
> We don't have the space to incorporate a city, or urbanized living, within this small village of a community that we have," says Julie Lee, president of a neighborhood civic association and founding member of Arlingtonians for Upzoning Transparency, a group fighting the plan. Comments to these zoning fights are full of gems like this. Arlington is about the size of Buffalo NY and 50% denser. It hasn’t been anything…
An interesting question to ask is why do we always seem to grow by increasing density rather than establishing new small towns? Leon Krier's Drawing For Architecture contrasts over-expansion both with excessive density and excessive sprawl and by duplication. It seems to me that if it were legal to do so there are plenty of tiny towns that could grow to the size of a small city like Arlington or Buffalo.
We result don't expand by increasing density, this has been generally banned by zoning over the past 60 years.
We mostly expand with sprawl, which causes long commutes, massive pollution, social isolation, bad health, and all sorts of other things. Which for people who want it, great, enjoy! But we ban density, and don't ban sprawl.
As for expanding other towns, this must be done by those with the capital to buy a house, or start a business to offer jobs, etc. Young people starting our do not have these things, and we need to accommodate them somewhere. To everyone who suggests building in a different small town, I suggest that they be the change they wish to see and move out to make room for somebody else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With all due respect that’s _your_ dream. I hated growing up in a house with a back yard and a driveway. I’m not sure I would have wanted to grow up in downtown Manhattan, but an apartment in a small city would have been infinitely better.
>”I hated growing up in a house with a back yard and a driveway.” May I ask why?
And even if they could in most bedroom towns, there's nothing to do.
For me, I'd live in the country or the city never the suburbs.
I had to beg my parents to take me anywhere. My kids just leave the house and find friends or say hi to neighbors. No effort on our part and they get to be free.
> We don't have the space to incorporate a city, or urbanized living, within this small village of a community that we have," says Julie Lee, president of a neighborhood civic association and founding member of Arlingtonians for Upzoning Transparency, a group fighting the plan. Comments to these zoning fights are full of gems like this. Arlington is about the size of Buffalo NY and 50% denser. It hasn’t been anything…
An interesting question to ask is why do we always seem to grow by increasing density rather than establishing new small towns? Leon Krier's Drawing For Architecture contrasts over-expansion both with excessive density and excessive sprawl and by duplication. It seems to me that if it were legal to do so there are plenty of tiny towns that could grow to the size of a small city like Arlington or Buffalo.
I don’t care much for multi-family housing personally. I don’t want to share a wall with anyone, not even a family member and I’m willing to make some concessions for that freedom. However, recently I became interested in adding an “accessory dwelling unit” on my property to accommodate aging relatives. Despite having the space for a small 500-750 sqft unit on my property, my city’s zoning rules killed the idea. The…
Are you OK with other people living in multi unit housing, or does your desire for a detached unit extend to others' way of living? I ask because it seems that where ever this happens, many people oppose merely allowing multiunit because they don't want to live in multiunit, even though it doesn't actually impact where they live. It's like lifting a ban on a certain type of car; it doesn't change your car, and there…
Unfortunately people don’t like to admit the downsides of dense multi-family housing either: no parking, increases traffic/congestion, reduction in greenery, looking straight into neighbors windows, etc.
I’d personally like to see smarter zoning with mixed usage in a nice balance where all kinds of types of residences can coexist but I believe it requires proper administration. Otherwise the economic incentive for builders will result in the dominance of multi-family housing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An interesting question to ask is why do we always seem to grow by increasing density rather than establishing new small towns? Leon Krier's Drawing For Architecture contrasts over-expansion both with excessive density and excessive sprawl and by duplication. It seems to me that if it were legal to do so there are plenty of tiny towns that could grow to the size of a small city like Arlington or Buffalo.
As long as we don't have teleportation there are network effects to concentration. I don't like it though, and would take a pay cut to move to a more roomy area.