this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2024
419 points (97.9% liked)

News

23301 readers
3850 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net -3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Build more housing. That's what you need to prioritize.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

We have significantly more vacant units (around 15M) than homeless people (around 600k-1.5M by various estimates).

New dense energy efficient units connected to social services and green energy infrastructure would be great for everyone. But the idea that we just don't have residential space to house people is totally wrong.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

And where are they located, and why are they empty?

There's your next big problem, a significant fraction of them aren't where people want (or need) to be, or are vacation homes and don't belong in these stats (unless you want to eminent domain them). Suburbs and ghost towns and remote regions pushes the average up.

https://todayshomeowner.com/general/guides/highest-home-vacancy-rates/

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

And where are they located, and why are they empty?

https://smartasset.com/data-studies/vacant-houses-2023

More than 300,000 housing units in New York City sat vacant. However, the Big Apple’s total vacancy rate of 8.3% in 2022 fell slightly from five years earlier (9.7%). Meanwhile, San Francisco had over 52,000 vacant units in 2022 for a 12.7% vacancy rate.

Turns out nobody wants to live in checks notes New York City or San Fransisco.

a significant fraction of them aren’t where people want (or need)

There are definitely large numbers of vacant units in areas that were de-industrialized or hit with natural disasters. However, speculators moving in and gobbling up the properties at their bargain basement rates, then squatting on them to drive up the overall value of real estate in the area, result in artificially high real estate rates across these neighborhoods. Even in places with ostensibly low demand for housing, the prices remain higher than in historical periods of high demand.

Suburbs and ghost towns and remote regions pushes the average up.

Over-development in less accessible places can make neighborhoods unattractive due to the commute. But the solution to this problem is often to improve mass transit in these neighborhoods and develop local public services (schools, post offices, grocery stores, etc) at their centers. Then do the one thing that Americans hate and fear more than anything - BRING IN THE MIGRANTS. Populate the neighborhoods with large socially cohesive cohorts of new people and energize the neighborhoods with public works spending.

This creates a virtuous cycle of economic growth and development that brings in still more people and creates new demand for more goods and services. This is exactly what big midwestern towns did to revitalize in the wake of deindustrialization. Chattanooga, Tennessee installed public Gigabit internet and became the center of a Tennessee tech boom. Detroit accumulated a network of art collectives in its low rent housing and reinvented itself as a cultural center. Atlanta, Georgia is enjoying an enormous economic expansion thanks to new federally subsidized battery plants in the city.

When public policy identifies a housing surplus, policymakers can create a virtuous cycle of development by building new business capacity in the immediate vicinity. Then you solve joblessness, homelessness, and a stagnant economy in one go.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

https://comptroller.nyc.gov/reports/spotlight-new-york-citys-housing-supply-challenge/ 🤷

I don't disagree with the rest, walkable cities are important, speculators shouldn't be involved in housing, etc. But some places genuinely have a lack of available housing and the solution is to build away.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Some places have a lack of affordable housing. But anywhere you go, you can find living space at a high enough price point.

The only real exception is in the midst of a natural disaster or similar event, at which point the housing is typically exhausted because it is gobbled up by state bureaucracies for housing troops going in or refugees flooding out. And these sudden shortages are resolved by moving people to long term housing in surrounding areas, not by throwing up enormous tower blocks overnight.

That's not even to say we don't need new builds. A lot of the existing housing stock is old, poorly maintained, or inefficient. But the idea that we simply don't have enough units to go around is real estate developer ad copy. It isn't based in reality. And pursuing the policies advocated by the "not enough housing" folks inevitably leads to large new Luxury branded establishments that get sold off to speculators rather than lived in by the unhoused.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Sounds like eminent domain talk if you think there's enough suitable available homes already