Gov. Gavin Newsom of California threatened to redirect funding from counties that fail to reduce homelessness in their communities during a visit to Pacoima following his controversial order for state agencies to remove encampments.
Nah, I’m with Num10ck. There are more than enough houses with existing infrastructure to utilities. Putting up more homes is wasteful and adds carbon into the air.
The state has the power to levy a heavy vacancy tax on unoccupied spaces. I think thats the best route to getting people housed.
Rent control disincentivizes building new apartments though. That is, if I take out a load of debt to build a $10M apartment, and due to rent control my profit is going to be capped at levels that are probably below what I could get through low-risk treasury bills, why would I build anything? Sure, you can get it built by the state, but states have a distressing tendency to stop adequately funding required infrastructure and not do necessary maintenance in a timely fashion (more so than most shitty apartment complexes even).
I entirely agree that NIMBYs need to be steamrolled though. High-density housing is far, far better than sprawl.
My wet dream is dead malls converted to indoor cities. Turn old shops into efficiency apartments, the huge end cap stores like Boscovs into grocery stores, food court into cafeteria-style dining. Hell, even keep some food places or shops if you want to get some capitalists hard. Just charge them rent out the ass in exchange for a nearly captive consumer base and use the funds to improve the place.
maybe California shouldn’t have a 3-5 YEAR waitlist for section 8/Housing Choice Vouchers housing?
maybe they should force all those empty retail/commercial/industrial/residential properties to be put to use or forced to hand over to the state.
maybe the church of scientology shouldnt be allowed to own thousands of buildings in california with no stated purposed or published staff?
Maybe they should also start building more apartments at rent controlled rates?
Its not just about the empty spots. Those are owned.
Its about the rich people denying apartments to maintain the clean skyline.
Edit: added also
Nah, I’m with Num10ck. There are more than enough houses with existing infrastructure to utilities. Putting up more homes is wasteful and adds carbon into the air.
The state has the power to levy a heavy vacancy tax on unoccupied spaces. I think thats the best route to getting people housed.
Oh I also agree we need to tax unoccupied housing. On a sliding scale too since there are land barons rampant in our nation.
This would force real estate companies to fill homes that costs them loads to keep empty. Instantly increasing supply and thus cost of rent goes down.
Oh OK I must have misunderstood you. I’m all about rent stabilizing and taxing the rich.
Carry on.
I wasn’t clear. Edited an also for clarification.
Rent control disincentivizes building new apartments though. That is, if I take out a load of debt to build a $10M apartment, and due to rent control my profit is going to be capped at levels that are probably below what I could get through low-risk treasury bills, why would I build anything? Sure, you can get it built by the state, but states have a distressing tendency to stop adequately funding required infrastructure and not do necessary maintenance in a timely fashion (more so than most shitty apartment complexes even).
I entirely agree that NIMBYs need to be steamrolled though. High-density housing is far, far better than sprawl.
My wet dream is dead malls converted to indoor cities. Turn old shops into efficiency apartments, the huge end cap stores like Boscovs into grocery stores, food court into cafeteria-style dining. Hell, even keep some food places or shops if you want to get some capitalists hard. Just charge them rent out the ass in exchange for a nearly captive consumer base and use the funds to improve the place.
I live in a deep red state and it’s that wait, or more, here, and I believe it’s a lottery system, at that.