Amen. Any basic necessity obviously won’t work well with the laws of supply and demand and should be given a different relationship to the free market.
What does that mean? Like, what are you invisioning? Forced government housing for all? No one is allowed to own a plot of land with a house style of their choice?
I want to live in a cabin in the woods. My friend wants a 4 bedroom colonial because he wants kids. How can we have the freedom to have these things unless we are allowed to buy and sell homes to each other?
I think there is a different take here. The government needs to subsidize large scale housing development with a focus on housing cooperatives (people owned apartment complexes, not profit-driven company owned), and change laws so that people don’t have to live so far away from where they work.
You can buy your house and plot of land, but we need more places for people to get out of the street in general, and ways to put people in places where they can contribute to a city’s economy. The government can also do things like reduce minimum parking requirements within a city so that apartment builders don’t need to subsidize car infrastructure out of pocket. This would have the side benefit of people walking or biking to work more, which can help out local businesses in a city.
The benefit is that if there are more affordable housing options available, that gives people the freedom to switch jobs or take a leave from their job to care for their loved ones when they fall ill. The stability that is provided by having a home is so important to being able to integrate into society.
edit: adding some links for sources on housing cooperative effects on housing costs and the cost of parking requirements on new developments.
If housing isn’t an economy at all, I can understand how you came to that viewpoint in your original comment. But, I feel that as a usual internet comment, it was exaggerrating and envisioning an ideal world.
We aren’t living in one of those. When I read that comment I understood it as basic housing not being an economy, and luxury housing still being purchasable-- which is much more realistic. And so I wanted to give a bunch of examples in the ways that it is feasible to create basic housing even in our capitalist system today.
I mean, hopefully in the future we can get to a post-scarcity economy where not only is the housing provided for free but it is also exactly what we want. That day won’t be for a long time, though…
Housing shouldn’t be an economy at all.
Amen. Any basic necessity obviously won’t work well with the laws of supply and demand and should be given a different relationship to the free market.
What does that mean? Like, what are you invisioning? Forced government housing for all? No one is allowed to own a plot of land with a house style of their choice?
I want to live in a cabin in the woods. My friend wants a 4 bedroom colonial because he wants kids. How can we have the freedom to have these things unless we are allowed to buy and sell homes to each other?
I think there is a different take here. The government needs to subsidize large scale housing development with a focus on housing cooperatives (people owned apartment complexes, not profit-driven company owned), and change laws so that people don’t have to live so far away from where they work.
You can buy your house and plot of land, but we need more places for people to get out of the street in general, and ways to put people in places where they can contribute to a city’s economy. The government can also do things like reduce minimum parking requirements within a city so that apartment builders don’t need to subsidize car infrastructure out of pocket. This would have the side benefit of people walking or biking to work more, which can help out local businesses in a city.
The benefit is that if there are more affordable housing options available, that gives people the freedom to switch jobs or take a leave from their job to care for their loved ones when they fall ill. The stability that is provided by having a home is so important to being able to integrate into society.
edit: adding some links for sources on housing cooperative effects on housing costs and the cost of parking requirements on new developments.
Role of housing cooperatives in reducing housing prices
Role of parking minimums in increasing housing/building prices
I agree with all that, but how does any of that get implied from “housing shouldn’t be an economy at all?”.
If housing isn’t an economy at all, I can understand how you came to that viewpoint in your original comment. But, I feel that as a usual internet comment, it was exaggerrating and envisioning an ideal world.
We aren’t living in one of those. When I read that comment I understood it as basic housing not being an economy, and luxury housing still being purchasable-- which is much more realistic. And so I wanted to give a bunch of examples in the ways that it is feasible to create basic housing even in our capitalist system today.
I mean, hopefully in the future we can get to a post-scarcity economy where not only is the housing provided for free but it is also exactly what we want. That day won’t be for a long time, though…