Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

close102 t1_isjaxoy wrote

You’re equating consumable and commodity goods with housing. A low end car could be $20k to buy. A low end condo would still be $150-200k to buy.

As much zoning regulations exist that prevent like a 3 family going into where a 1 family is today, there have been massive amounts of apartment complex development over the past decade throughout Providence, Rhode Island, and Southern MA. Developers are already building to excess and none of it is affordable.

Even so, not sure why there would be opposition from the city/state to take over land not being used to build more housing. Seems like you’re just really pro private development.

1

dionidium t1_iskgtag wrote

I believe it should be legal for private parties to purchase private property and build apartments on the land they own, but assuming that were legal I have no problem with the government acquiring land on which to build housing themselves.

The only downside is that it can become a bit of a political football deciding where to put that housing. If the government is going to do it, it would be best if they did it by seamlessly integrating into existing neighborhoods, which sort of seems like what’s in play here, anyway, so I don’t have any big problem with that.

In general, though, I would rather the government simply give money to those who need it. That’s a simpler, more straightforward way to approach the problem.

1