Live data from Hacker News

To recruit teachers, school districts are building homes

nytimes.com

11–20 of 75 posts

Re: To recruit teachers, school districts are building homes

#12

The core fabric of society - the deal that was offered by society to the people - to work in a job, own a house, raise a family, have a retirement - has decayed away entirely for many people.

The housing part never 'decayed', it was actively blocked by the people who already had homes. That's why you see things now like California actively overriding local zoning.

Re: To recruit teachers, school districts are building homes

#13
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not make housing cost less instead?

They're not mutually exclusive goals. Wanting a more affording salary and scalable housing both are valid goals.

Governments may be uniquely positioned to offer housing incentives as they often own the land, and control the zoning.

Re: To recruit teachers, school districts are building homes

#14
It used to be like this in rural communities even up into the 70s and 80s. The town's branch manager would be young, shipped out for a few years and live in a house the bank owned and given a stipend to maintain it. Same with the postmaster and other professions.

Re: To recruit teachers, school districts are building homes

#15

The core fabric of society - the deal that was offered by society to the people - to work in a job, own a house, raise a family, have a retirement - has decayed away entirely for many people.

The housing part never 'decayed', it was actively blocked by the people who already had homes. That's why you see things now like California actively overriding local zoning.

>, it was actively blocked by the people who already had homes.

You're not wrong but this is too simplistic and avoids holding up a mirror that really ought to be held up. Zoning was the "we're gonna regulate our way into utopia" of their time. The class of useful idiots who made it happen and the class of useful idiots who will go to bat for it's continuance because they make a buck on it is far broader than that.

Re: To recruit teachers, school districts are building homes

#16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The housing part never 'decayed', it was actively blocked by the people who already had homes. That's why you see things now like California actively overriding local zoning.

>, it was actively blocked by the people who already had homes. You're not wrong but this is too simplistic and avoids holding up a mirror that really ought to be held up. Zoning was the "we're gonna regulate our way into utopia" of their time. The class of useful idiots who made it happen and the class of useful idiots who will go to bat for it's continuance because they make a buck on it is far broader than that.

It's not simplistic. It is literally the core problem with housing. Zoning had a first objective of preventing Black families from moving into white neighborhoods, and then, in the 1980s, assumed a new role of driving scarcity (and thus the price of houses in areas of opportunity, to the benefit of existing homeowners).

Re: To recruit teachers, school districts are building homes

#17

A land value tax would fix this

I know the Georgism joke here, but we don't need an LVT to fix this; we just need states to override home rule on minimum density requirements for residential and mixed-use zoning. The core problem here is in fact very simple!

Re: To recruit teachers, school districts are building homes

#18
post #3

Could just, you know, pay more…

Teachers in major metro school systems already have quite a good deal. Rural schoolteachers really do have the deal everyone heard about in 1990s politics, but urban schoolteachers are generally economically privileged.

(That doesn't mean they aren't impacted by housing scarcity in ways that disrupt the administration of school systems; they are. But the problem isn't compensation, the problem is corrupt regulation written to prop up homeowner assets.)

Re: To recruit teachers, school districts are building homes

#19

A land value tax would fix this

A land value tax without changes in non-tax land use regulations would not fix, and a land value tax would not be necessary after removing the non-tax land use restrictions which this responds to.

Re: To recruit teachers, school districts are building homes

#20
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How?

It would allow housing to be substantially denser.

How would an LVT do that when the barrier to dense housing is zoning restrictions?

Changing the tax structure doesn't remove that restriction.

Post reply on HN