drugme
Joined 8 years ago
Karma
1,376
Submissions
402
Member since
Dec 14
Recent submissions
Comment · 7 years ago
Comment · 7 years ago
Freezing rents to fight increasing costs makes as much sense as limiting the maximum reading on thermometers to fight increasing temperatures.
You realize that, logically speaking -- there's no analogy to be made here.
Right?
Comment · 7 years ago
That's generally what we wanted companies to do,
Maybe so -- but as a response it completely dodges the question of whether or it has been a contributing factor or not.
Comment · 7 years ago
No one is obligated to rent a property from someone else.
That's a pretty weird statement to make.
Do you really believe that everyone (or even a majority) of people who currently rent are in a position to buy a place to live if they wanted to?
Comment · 7 years ago
It results in rents which are equal to what the open market price would have been.
This is a pretty strong claim to make. Can you provide data to substantiate?
Comment · 7 years ago
It works fairly well in NYC, too.
Not without tradeoffs, mind you. But it does basically work.
Comment · 7 years ago
The solution is to build houses,
It's one option among many.
And by itself -- most likely not a sufficient solution (or any kind of a game changer).
I just don't understand this stance at all.
Basically the main reason this "stance" is that the locals know better: that simply allowing newer (unregulated) construction isn't going to bring their rents down -- or that is to say: do something about availability in their income brackets, and not just yours and mine -- anytime soon.
Comment · 7 years ago
The problem with housing there has one simple cause: NIMBYism
It's definitely simple-sounding, as a single cause -- but unfortunately that doesn't make it so.
Any sober analysis of the current housing crisis points to a convergence of multiple, and in some cases highly nuanced factors -- ranging from shifting crime rates and the collapse of urban industrial base; to shifts in government policy (including the near-abandonment of federal support for new public housing initiatives); and a whole bunch of others. And yes there's something known as "zoning" which plays a part also.
But the idea that NIMBYism is the sole important factor - or even the most important factor - just doesn't hold water.
If you're skeptical of this, just ask yourself: "What causes NIMBYism?"
Comment · 7 years ago
TL;DR: it is all about removing distraction.
Which is just silly of course.
It doesn't "remove" distraction - but rather ameliorates some of your distractions while creating others. And as with any other interface / abstraction -- whether it's a good idea or not is a matter of tradeoffs involving various factors.
TL;DR same old, same old.
As cold and cynical it is, what the self-driving car "pioneers" are doing -- it's not nearly as reckless (and flat-out clueless) as what this guy did.