our shit wouldn’t be as cheap however and nothing is stopping people from building enough housing save the desire to keep prices artificially high. Lacking demand they could have just built less to maximize their gain. Given more demand yet they could have built more but little enough to again maximize gain. Seeing a pattern here?
nothing is stopping people from building enough housing save the desire to keep prices artificially high
I don’t know where you’re located. I live in a big European city. The space here is limited. The new housing is mostly being built outside of the city really, and it will take years for it to get the proper treatment (like buses, trams, metro line). The immigrants are directly competing with me for the in-city apartments. This could be different if you’re located in, IDK, Iceland, where the space is not really a problem, or in USA where you don’t have public services.
our shit wouldn’t be as cheap
Our cheap shit is imported from cheap countries though?
Given more demand yet they could have built more but little enough to again maximize gain
In 10 to 20 years. But the problem of competing for limited resources is now. Seeing a problem here?
The space here is limited… The immigrants are directly competing with me for the in-city apartments.
More desirable locations will be too expensive for many, or most, people to afford. As local economies change, and different locations become desirable, people will be priced out and forced to move. Good city planning decisions can slow this down to allow people to adapt, but trying to freeze things in place is futile.
It’s not really possible to set up city planning regulations so the population stays exactly the same. If a city were successful in making itself an undesirable place to live so that no one new would move there, it would probably start losing its population, which (like growth) forces its own hard planning decisions.
our shit wouldn’t be as cheap however and nothing is stopping people from building enough housing save the desire to keep prices artificially high. Lacking demand they could have just built less to maximize their gain. Given more demand yet they could have built more but little enough to again maximize gain. Seeing a pattern here?
I don’t know where you’re located. I live in a big European city. The space here is limited. The new housing is mostly being built outside of the city really, and it will take years for it to get the proper treatment (like buses, trams, metro line). The immigrants are directly competing with me for the in-city apartments. This could be different if you’re located in, IDK, Iceland, where the space is not really a problem, or in USA where you don’t have public services.
Our cheap shit is imported from cheap countries though?
In 10 to 20 years. But the problem of competing for limited resources is now. Seeing a problem here?
Not really. This is not a new problem. This is not a surprise. This is the result of putting off change until it becomes a more serious issue.
Given the nature of politics, of people, problems will always be ignored until they become critical
More desirable locations will be too expensive for many, or most, people to afford. As local economies change, and different locations become desirable, people will be priced out and forced to move. Good city planning decisions can slow this down to allow people to adapt, but trying to freeze things in place is futile.
It’s not really possible to set up city planning regulations so the population stays exactly the same. If a city were successful in making itself an undesirable place to live so that no one new would move there, it would probably start losing its population, which (like growth) forces its own hard planning decisions.
Thank you captain obvious. What’s your point in the discussion, as you havent made one in that comment.