The first 100% of primary residence demand should never be anything other than affordable. Any other category of housing should only be tolerated in the stock beyond that threshold.
The normalisation of affordable housing as a legitimate concept is one of the most carcinogenic social infections.
Nobody would build anything if the first X number of units had to be affordable, unless I'm misunderstanding you. The city needs 200k units of affordable, and so until that need is met, any new unit is affordable? Development would be stifled entirely. And I hate it, as someone who likes affordable housing, but it's a give and take, and nobody is going to spend money on a project that they can't make money. Mandatory set-asides on projects over X number of units is the only feasible compromise.
Affordability is a function of an economic environment, which makes it an intrinsically imaginary problem.
All governments have a unique ability, through policy, to require the provision of a base load of subsistence resources before extraction is tolerated, not doing so is literally a choice.
Tolerating the concept of affordable housing creates an unnecessary, and debasing, stratification.
To rephrase my original assertion, the first 100% of primary residence demand should just be understood to be housing. Secondary, short stay, premium, and other use cases should only be tolerated in the stock beyond that initial 100%.
I appreciate what you're saying, but I don't understand how it's feasible. You have people with second homes in beach communities, and so they shouldn't have those, those second homes should be primary residences. But those communities, now, are not situated to support people in those as primary residence, not at 100%. I'm talking schools, police, fire, utilities, the whole nine. All of those things take into account basically nonuse during a certain time. And that's excluding the fact that if these were occupied full time, people wouldn't be able to get to work every day, it would be chaos. And yes, there are solutions, but feasibility is key, and I just don't see it being feasible.
I like what Mamdani is doing. If you're essentially wasting space, having essentially uninhabited apartments in a city that needs affordable places to live, he's taxing the shit out of them (I'm simplifying). And so ideally this creates some pool of funds to be used toward affordable housing, but at the end of the day I still think the best thing to do is mandate set-asides for affordable, 20% of the units on any project. An alternative is obviously that the government builds housing, but the benefit of private development is that now those affordable units are also tied to market rate units, and so the developer has an interest in maintaining all the units. With a 100% government funded affordable housing project, it just leaves the door open for cuts that turns it from an opportunity into a slum.
I don't disagree with you, I just don't know that it's realistic. But I do think its philosophically where the discussion needs to begin, and then we need to account for pesky reality.
I’m starting to understand why he won…
Somebody like this at the very top would be so … what’s the word of I’m looking for… refreshing.
b..b..but... socialism can never work? ^/s^
Socialism for the people can never work! Now for corporations... it's always viable! Bailouts for everyone!
Except in all those decent countries where is does work.
nu uh, it doesn't count, those countries either aren't really socialist, or it wouldn't work here because... draws card those countries have less heterogenous populations ^/s^
Alternative to CBS.
Thank you for your service 🫡
Wait.....cbs headlike 400k. Alternative link headline 200k.
......whaaaa???
There's already 200,000 and they want to add 200,000 more.
Ok, so then the CBS headline is just false.
Can't "plan" to build 200,000 houses, if they're already built.
Eh, they didn't say "plan to build 400,000 affordable housing units", they said "plan for 400,000 units". The plan involves building 200,000 units, and stabilizing 200,000 existing units. That's not really a false headline.
Aww shit. This is a thing now. Damn.
Fuck Batman, Mamdani is the hero Gotham needs.
... ok :(
Aww, now I feel like such a heel! 😄
What if we give you Tucson in stead? That should be about the amount of cursed you're used to 😉
Ok! :D :D
I'm sure with all the latent mental illness he'll be great in bed!
In the defense of Bruce/ Batman I'm pretty sure he would give up his wealth and hang up his cape if it would actually save Gotham. Problem is Gotham is quite literally cursed like on multiple levels, pretty sure a demon world from 40k is less cursed also it's in New Jersey which probably isn't helping the situation.
quite literally cursed like on multiple levels
Unfortunate.
also it's in New Jersey
I dont like this reference, since two face said "You either die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain."
and I dont want him to die...
Everybody dies
I'll believe that when I see it!
Hmm, good point 🤔
I think it’s interesting how housing makes it explicitly official that we have a two-class system. There’s “affordable” housing and “other” housing.
Nooooo! More supply means prices fall! That's socialism!
/S
HOW is he Going to Pay for this Thought? ALL he's Done is get MILLIONS and MILLIONS of Dollars from Corporations!
HOW is he Going to Pay for this Thought?
Thoughts are for free.
No. Thought costs upbringing. If you're raised by a restrictive parent, you don't think for yourself.
If you're raised by a parent who's not afraid to let you fail for yourself, you get an oppertunity to think why you failed, and how to not fail next time.
For every critical thought you have, something in your past taught you to think.
Corporations need low income housing to hire talent into NY.
Will he need to change any zoning laws in New York to do this?
I would think as mayor he would probably be the person in the best position to do such a thing.
From the Common Dreams website Zedstrian posted:
"It will also include modifications to the zoning code to create hundreds of housing co-ops."
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News