Is that a geometric proof
-
-
-
He’s just a logical guy yknow
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
The context for that tweet are competing proposals in Berkeley for how to develop a BART station area. One side wants 100% BMR housing, the other wants mixed-income housing. The 100% BMR housing side has not identified funding, so it is very unlikely to happen at scale. 1/
- Još 26 drugih odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
This is so presumptuous, too. If it was explicitly reserved for the poor, maybe there's be some concerns about a two-tier housing system a la the public option concern. But if affordable housing is open to everyone you'd expect a random distribution, right?
-
mixed-income public housing has a stellar track record in central & northern europe and a decent pre-thatcher record in the uk
- Još 2 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
You see, the less affordable housing you have, the less poverty.
-
They mean % in a building. Like when you go to a zoning hearing they say "this is going to be 10% affordable units" So a building that's 100% affordable would be true public housing. And people do better in mixed income neighborhoods
- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
-
-
it is easy to escape poverty: simply do not have a house to live in. problem solved.
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
Yeah so much of where this did not work was because we built public housing away from city grids instead of integrated with them, and then made them look like depressing windowless prison blocks. Isolation is the issue to be resolved, not the affordability.
- Još 2 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.
