Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
But give Charles credit - he is smart enough to not live in a Human Storage Facility, even though he may preach about how all good socialists should be living in one.
Example #983853 of "do what I say, not what I do"
So San Franscisco is dense, but not really.
And the truly wealthy -- like in and around Seattle -- live in absolute sparsity, either in large mansions, big old homes, or whole floor apartments.
Meanwhile, having bought in as an investment, the best thing for existing owners would be not to densify, but to take property off the market.
The US has done this continually through GMAs and land acquisitions, but urban farms. That's a brand new way to keep the newcomers out of the market!
And, as others have noted, tax breaks are nothing compared to what an owner of an empty lot can make by selling/developing the land.
Also, it is socialists putting up apartment buildings and creating density right? I forget.
A house on one lot that rents to 8 people has higher density than the four 2BR 1.5BA 1 garage townhouses that have 1.5 people per townhouse that are four stories.
The heavy, to the point of burdensome, property taxation of single family houses to subsidize denser low income housing.
You know. Single family dwellings being so evil to density proponents like yourself.
And. You know. Single family dwellings like the one you live in, Charles.
Mudede -- Again your argument collapses due to a weak foundation.
Our society isn't organized around "the accumulation of money as its core principle." Silly Marxist.
Our society is organized around the liberty of individuals and the primacy of private property. Throw in freedoms of expression and association and you'll find that the organizing idea of our society is for people to create what they want that serves a purpose to others. For that effort, value is exchanged.
Wealth accumulation is far more often a byproduct of people's motivations to be productive.
For those that can't or won't find what they want to create and contribute -- there's the refuge of statism.
I know it challenges the worldview necessary for your strain of social totalitarianism but.
1) Most Americans (53%) are VERY satisfied with their job. (9-in-10 are at least somewhat satisfied). And 82% of people feel appreciated by their employers.
2) People in the suburbs are marginally happier than people in cities. And Non-urban minorities are just as satisfied as non-urban whites with the communities they live in.
While we're at it:
1) Strict gun laws are highly correlated with high gun violence.
2) Statistically, the number of mass shootings has not increased.
3) The most "open and transparent" President punished journalists and spies on citizens.
4) Gitmo is still open and the Iraq war was won – until it wasn't.
5) You can't keep your doctor, after all.
Hope and change!
2) Literally anything and every practice, object, cause, etc in this society can theoretically be used (and often is used) by elites to subjugate the poor.
3) There is no real evidence that actual urban farming is anything but an asset for low-income residents in the vast majority if not all cases. This article is a theoretical hypothesis masquerading as a statement of fact with no evidence to support it.
4) Attempts to increase density have not solved housing problems in San Francisco because of underlying political obstacles. If you actually want to learn about this issue, see the San Francisco Public Press' spectacular coverage of it in their latest issue. http://sfpublicpress.org/housingsolution…
Good words in this piece, Charles. Thank you.
I can't keep up with Charles. Last year he loved trees. This year community gardens are oppressive to the poor. He's so picky.