So the US mapped by property value looks like China.. :-)
Mapping the U.S. By Property Value Instead of Land Area
91–100 of 173 posts
Re: Mapping the U.S. By Property Value Instead of Land Area
#92I wonder how things will change once self driving cars become the norm.
You'd also need to reform the way school districting works. Well, I guess it could cause another round of suburban flight of the affluent, but the underlying problem would still be there.
Re: Mapping the U.S. By Property Value Instead of Land Area
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
The original post from Metrocosm is here: http://metrocosm.com/the-housing-value-of-every-county-in-th... . It provides a link to the source data from the Economist for the county-level data.
Where is the link on that site? I didn't see one, which is why I went digging for it and turned up the link above.
I finally found it in a different article linked via a pingback. The article above does not reference county-level data at all from what I can tell.
Re: Mapping the U.S. By Property Value Instead of Land Area
#94i kind of understand why people here frequently against high-density - the way it is done in US ends up with pretty unlivable space of towering boxes surrounded by concrete and asphalt (which is just obvious result of profit maximization while obeying height limits, etc.. While i think having a 200 stories tower surrounded by a park would be better than a bunch of 20-30 stories mid-towers sticking out of concrete/asp…
>While i think having a 200 stories tower surrounded by a park would be better than a bunch of 20-30 stories mid-towers sticking out of concrete/asphalt space)
Ugh, please no. This is essentially what Le Corbusier advocated and the results are disasterous. It leads to all of the downsides of density. Lots of people taking up space, but none of the benefits (easy access to shopping, entertainment, school, work, etc.), because everything's so damn far away from each other.
Re: Mapping the U.S. By Property Value Instead of Land Area
#95Isn't this just the same as population density? I think there's an XKCD about this ... https://xkcd.com/1138/
No, unless I'm mistaken, it's literally the sum value of all the bare land, not including the value of the buildings. California seems to have a third of value in the United States, and the Northeast Corridor has another third, but neither have a third of the population. (edit: I stand corrected, but it's still notable that property value and density aren't necessarily correlated.)
The source article is complaining about a $100 million condo in NYC that is listed at $6 million, and it pulls the values for the rest of the country from the Census (which tends to track households more than properties), so I think it is just the opposite, it mostly reflects the value of buildings.
Re: Mapping the U.S. By Property Value Instead of Land Area
#96Why should land values be homogenous?
General cultural belief in equality of both opportunity and outcome. Why should a real estate developer, and the whole horde of commissioned vampires that follow them, make 10x as much "over there" as "over here" when its the same product for the same people making mostly the same money at mostly the same jobs, just a different location?
Various standard of living effects, the $3M I'm not spending on similar housing in CA is improving my standard of living and retirement plans far beyond folks living there, after all its not like CA pays much more (maybe 30% tops, but the cost of living is like 2 times higher) or that stuff ordered from Amazon costs people in CA any less. Is it fair that I get a 90th percentile national salary but because I don't live in CA I get to experience a roughly 95th percentile lifestyle locally?
In post industrial world, once capital investments are worthless (capital as in giant factory, enormous milling machine, whatever its all scrap iron moved to China now) then the only worth is people, who can move around anywhere very quickly, yet they don't. This also impacts multi-site multi-office sized companies... the mantra for very small companies is everyone has to be at the same site in the same place in the same open office for 12 hours a day breathing each others coughs and sneezes because thats modern business, but how this interacts with multinationals is mysterious. I'll be honest, I have no idea how many offices my employer has, but I assure you its very large, I can't even be sure how many timezones... Work no longer requires physical plant investments, so where do / should people live if they no longer need to live in walking distance of the foundry or factory? If my boss lives and works at an office three states away, why do I need to drive 20 miles each day into an office to "work" "with" him? Its an aspect of economic belief that is in considerable turmoil where common beliefs when mashed up against observation create all kinds of strange cognitive dissonance.
Re: Mapping the U.S. By Property Value Instead of Land Area
#97Isn't this just the same as population density? I think there's an XKCD about this ... https://xkcd.com/1138/
[deleted]
Re: Mapping the U.S. By Property Value Instead of Land Area
#98Isn't this just the same as population density? I think there's an XKCD about this ... https://xkcd.com/1138/
No, several of the middle states have fairly large populations ex: Iowa 3+million, but disapear in this map.
PS: This is really a map of wealth * population.
Re: Mapping the U.S. By Property Value Instead of Land Area
#99I don't think I've ever seen a worse Cartogram. At least they did an animation to make it easier to understand, but a regular map with simple choropleth would be a thousand times better.
Re: Mapping the U.S. By Property Value Instead of Land Area
#100Why should land values be homogenous?
General cultural belief in equality of both opportunity and outcome. Why should a real estate developer, and the whole horde of commissioned vampires that follow them, make 10x as much "over there" as "over here" when its the same product for the same people making mostly the same money at mostly the same jobs, just a different location? Various standard of living effects, the $3M I'm not spending on similar housing…
>General cultural belief in equality of both opportunity and outcome. Why should a real estate developer, and the whole horde of commissioned vampires that follow them, make 10x as much "over there" as "over here" when its the same product for the same people making mostly the same money at mostly the same jobs, just a different location?
This might be a general subcultural belief. It's hardly generally accepted that equality of opportunity and outcome needs to be spread geographically spread out. In fact, I've never ever heard a serious case for it.
>Is it fair that I get a 90th percentile national salary but because I don't live in CA I get to experience a roughly 95th percentile lifestyle locally?
Fair in what sense? Without a definition of what you're considering to be fair, such questions are purely rhetorical.