Hey Mike, "market failure" may be technically accurate, but let's acknowledge that the Bay Area is quite landlocked. Yes, density could be and should be increased, though that will lead to other sizable problems. The no-growth, slow-growth movements there and elsewhere are not benevolent to nonresidents--and they should be--but they were…
Hey Mike, "market failure" may be technically accurate, but let's acknowledge that the Bay Area is quite landlocked. Yes, density could be and should be increased, though that will lead to other sizable problems. The no-growth, slow-growth movements there and elsewhere are not benevolent to nonresidents--and they should be--but they were very intentionally designed to avoid over-congestion, not really to increase home values. It feels like you're conflating the issues and ending up missing the target a bit. Lots of liberals and conservatives have believed in slow-growth policies as a way to avoid despoiling urban areas. Rather than lump it all as simply "market failure" you're avoiding naming the real issue of the failure of slow-growth strategies that resist the future vs. smart-growth ones that embrace it. We can do much better with this and name what needs to be named, even if those policies were championed by well-meaning people.
Hey Mike, "market failure" may be technically accurate, but let's acknowledge that the Bay Area is quite landlocked. Yes, density could be and should be increased, though that will lead to other sizable problems. The no-growth, slow-growth movements there and elsewhere are not benevolent to nonresidents--and they should be--but they were very intentionally designed to avoid over-congestion, not really to increase home values. It feels like you're conflating the issues and ending up missing the target a bit. Lots of liberals and conservatives have believed in slow-growth policies as a way to avoid despoiling urban areas. Rather than lump it all as simply "market failure" you're avoiding naming the real issue of the failure of slow-growth strategies that resist the future vs. smart-growth ones that embrace it. We can do much better with this and name what needs to be named, even if those policies were championed by well-meaning people.