It's not the lack of housing
It's the capitalism
Put a pin in that
this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2024
32 points (100.0% liked)
traingang
22594 readers
70 users here now
Post as many train pictures as possible.
All about urbanism and transportation, including freight transportation.
Home of train gang
:arm-L::train-shining::arm-R:
Talk about supply chain issues here!
List of cool books and videos about urbanism, transit, and other cool things
Titles must be informative. Please do not title your post "lmao" or use the tired "_____ challenge" format.
Archive links for reactionary sites, including the BBC.
LANDLORDS COWER IN FEAR OF MAOTRAIN
"that train pic is too powerful lmao" - u/Cadende
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
I mean, it’s both. The capitalism is definitely a problem but ultimately the vacancy rates in most of the US, especially major cities, are too low. There isn’t enough housing in the places it’s needed.
Just comparing US cities, which all have the capitalism problem, cities with higher vacancy rates have lower rents and lower rates of homelessness.
The capitalism is causing the lack of housing.
Fr. Capitalism incentivizes homeowners to block new housing because they want to "protect their investment" and that's how we got high rents.
That is not an example of market capitalism. It's an example of regulatory capture by homeowners: capitalist developers would like to build more housing, but homeowners cause the local government to block this.
With housing, we are in an unusual circumstance where both less government intervention (let people build more housing) and more government intervention (build public housing) would be better than the status quo.
agree!!! there's plenty of housing available RIGHT NOW but the rock all have to have 5 houses each. scum.
We probably couldn't use this method anymore because these days the courts absolutely do not allow the US government to do anything that could possibly be good. They would shut it down
something like 15,000 empty houses right now further more building brand new single family homes doesn't empower the working class, it empowers landlords
something like 15,000 empty houses right now
This statistic is meaningless because many of the cities with excess housing are in places with no jobs
building brand new single family homes doesn’t empower the working class, it empowers landlords
This is incorrect. The important statistic to look at is vacancy rate In almost all the major cities in the US vacency rates are well below the tenant empowering 8% and many are below the 5% rate where tenant have a fighting chance. We absolutely need more housing. I'd prefer duplexes, triplexes, row houses and apartments for urbanist reasons, but the idea that building more houses empowers landlords over the proletariat is ridiculous.
how are those two issues even remotely similar