Basic thought is that some nations can suffer from what is called an “institutional sclerosis”—so many rent-seeking and interest groups get so entrenched as to strangle any policies that would be conducive to growth.
-
-
Replying to @MScott_King @380kmh
have read this thesis (in papers, not in the book) and it's quite convincing A good leveling every 70 or 200 years sounds like a great idea.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @MorlockP @MScott_King
Institutionally, definitely--tho I'd argue this is also why we should demolish most buildings after 50 years of life
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
-
Replying to @MorlockP @MScott_King
don't be distracted by sentiment chief (besides, this is mainly a city policy--no need to do it where demand for land is low)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @380kmh @MScott_King
it's not sentiment it's (a) the idea of giving gov more power (b) the idea of throwing away all of that investment in dollars (b) the idea of throwing away all of that investment in attention / customization
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Alex "Boreal" Forrest 🚉 🌲 Retweeted Alex "Boreal" Forrest 🚉 🌲
50 was an arbitrary number, there's wiggle room there--the basic point is to address ridiculous US urban rent problems (DC is roughly as expensive per square foot as Tokyo, NYC and SF are even pricier than Hong Kong)https://twitter.com/380kmh/status/1111270673723338754 …
Alex "Boreal" Forrest 🚉 🌲 added,
Alex "Boreal" Forrest 🚉 🌲 @380kmhReplying to @GeoGDF01most importantly (imo), it helps keep the housing market responsive to changes in demand in USA, no matter how many people move into cities, the tendency is overwhelmingly to keep refurbishing old buildings rather than knocking them down and building something more appropriate1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
SF and Manhattan are the two unlabeled orange blocks (article is here: https://www.rentcafe.com/blog/rental-market/what-is-1500-worth-worldwide-rent-per-square-foot-around-the-globe/ …)pic.twitter.com/aJ1AOBtt3w
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
you're confusing "gov should force people to tear down good buildings" with "gov should STOP forbidding people from tearing down old / building new buildings"
-
-
Replying to @MorlockP @MScott_King
hey man, you brought gov into this, not me--I'm only concerned about outcome, not talking about method! if you've seen my threads on zoning you'll know I want to abolish most regulations on land use anyway
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
"we should demolish most buildings after 50 years" =/= "the government should order the demolition of buildings after 50 years" (tho knowing the state of political discourse in USA, I can understand the confusion)
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.