Conversation

Maybe but it could be that those things aren't desirable in PA. Improving scores in those areas might reduce the cost of labor but it might also be worth it to them to just pay the higher cost to maintain low scores there. Can't blame them for trading in their own interest.
2
1
If every city did this, it would lead to increased cost of living, decreased standard of living, increased commutes, increased homelessness, etc. And in fact, that's what every American city with job growth has done, which explains a lot of our societal ills.
1
20
I suppose you "can't blame" Palo Alto for selfishly guarding their own interests at the expense of the entire country, since every other city is doing the same thing. But you gotta recognize that this is very bad, and it would be better if we stopped cities from doing this.
1
18
The question for real estate investors then is: is anywhere safe? Where can one build a low density, high-priced community which will not constantly be attacked by invaders seeking to destroy what the inhabitants value?
5
lol, allowing a property owner to build an apartment building on their own property is not an "attack by invaders seeking to destroy". If you want to live in a low-density, high-priced retirement community, there are plenty in Florida far away from jobs. No risk of upzoning there
1
5
These retirement communities are purposely built on cheap land far away from cities (and even the closest ones are not big job centers). It's unlikely that jobs will come there because the only people living there are retired, so there's no workforce.
1
2
Show more replies