Having them rise slower than 28.7 percent a year is good.
-
-
Replying to @kimmaicutler
I am not being a troll here, I am just trying to help get the discussion onto a track that actually does create affordable housing. Building is not going to achieve that as I have highlighted before. Housing is a financial asset that we live in. It's priced accordingly.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kltblom
So... don't build anything? Or specifically create programs that provide deed-restricted housing that is accessible to minimum wage workers, which in SF generally requires a $300K per unit subsidy either from taxpayers or by tacking on fees to new market-rate housing?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler
Do build but yes, as you say, you have to literally dissuade the purchase of housing as an investment by regulating the market. That is what they have done in Stockholm Sweden as I have highlighted.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kltblom @kimmaicutler
is there a decent English language summary of what Stockholm is up to wrt housing policy?
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @interfluidity @kimmaicutler
Overview of Swedish housing policy that's a good introduction. Even with these protections, Sweden is also suffering from a housing affordability problem. http://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/uploads/Swedish_Housing_System_Memo.pdf …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Building more, in and of itself is not the solution , as housing in England, shows, where new supply has more than kept pace w household formation, the solution is a greater degree of job diffusion, not ruining great cities with massive building projects or sprawl.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @kltblom @interfluidity
England does not build enough to keep up with population growth. They have Greenbelt policies that limit the supply of land. They sold off public housing stock under Thatcher. Job diffusion hasn’t worked. See Brexit.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @kltblom
Has England ever made job diffusion a high-priority policy objective? Job concentration plausibly has a lot to do with Brexit, which seems to support job diffusion as potential policy rather than disconfirm it.
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @interfluidity @kimmaicutler
Don't know of any nation that has made job and knowledge diffusion a policy objective. Just don't know. Thanks for talking. Been a long day. Going to sleep.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Post WWII in America was a huge intentional redistribution of population and jobs away from urban centers under FDR and Truman.
-
-
Replying to @kimmaicutler @kltblom
I’m not sure what you are referring to, but I think it worth distinguishing conceptually between suburbanization (how should a given metro area be arranged?) and diffusion (how concentrated should economic activity be across metro areas?)
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.