The (now scrapped) Amazon NYC expansion had me thinking about whether more economic growth is always better for the existing city residents, especially in places that are already constrained by infrastructure and available land for development. 1/9
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @JohnArnoldFndtn
Respectfully, I think you're wrong. First of all, there are many first class cities that are denser than New York. Second, as you know well from your work. Supply doesn't not have to remain fixed while demand increases. New York can build even more dense residences...
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @Molson_Hart @JohnArnoldFndtn
...more than compensating for the increase in demand. This is what NYC has done well relative to San Francisco. Rents in NYC are actually falling. Finally I feel like you've taken a very Texaa-centric approach to the issue. Traffic? This is New York City, not Houston.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Molson_Hart
NYC can build denser but it’s a fight. Long term trend in rents is one direction even with short term declines https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rentjungle.com/average-rent-in-new-york-rent-trends/amp …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @JohnArnoldFndtn
Okay, I agree. Given that the political situation of New York City is likely not welcoming to supply to compensate for new demand, on balance, Amazon coming to New York is something of a mixed bag. There are winners (landholders, generally) and losers (common citizens).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
In any case, Amazon leaving New York shows that our system of government is pretty genius in how utilizes competition to benefit stakeholders. Virginia is a check on New York's anti-business practices and demand is channeled to where supply is more abundant.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.