| ▲ | newyankee 19 hours ago | |||||||||||||
Literally countries with so much surplus land: Canada, Australia etc. have housing crisis where most of the top 10-20% of the population has become speculators in housing and openly NIMBY with no interest in supply side solutions unless forced down. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | red-iron-pine 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||
most of the surplus land is marginally habitable, and costs increase dramatically when you get rural. plus "land" doesn't mean anything if you're not near the people and things you want do to, places to work, etc. do you want to do a 1.5 hour commute and hustle to live around Toronto, or do you want to live in Outer Nowhere, Manitoba, population 400, and where it regularly gets to -40C? | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | munchler 18 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||
If there’s surplus land, why build something unwanted in someone’s backyard? I’m a suburban NIMBY homeowner and I feel like you’re actually making my argument without realizing it. I’m all for building new houses on unused land. Can you please just do it without ruining my neighborhood? Build nice new neighborhoods and make them as dense as you’d like, but don’t try to force density on older, established neighborhoods that can’t support it. | ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | strken 18 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||
The problem we've got is that 10-20% of the population are speculating while another 50% of the population have almost their entire net worth stuffed into their family home. We're finding it difficult to rein in the top without ruining the middle too. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | cyanydeez 18 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||
Rentseeking is the super-capitalism in the room. | ||||||||||||||