The only way people who want homes get them built without an ROI to an investor is if they pay for it themselves.

Providing ROI to investors is a good thing if you want people to invest in something, because it means common self-interest will ensure it gets done.

▲

andsoitis 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Do you have a solution that would steer people who would build homes but who are investing in AI?

And to zoom out, aren't there other things that are EVEN MORE important to invest in than building homes?

▲

jstanley 2 hours ago | parent [-]

People who want houses have to be willing to either pay more for them or pay higher mortgage rates, I don't know what else you want me to suggest?

Where else is investor ROI going to come from?

▲

andsoitis an hour ago | parent [-]

What I'm trying to say is what is your concrete plan to incentivize investment AWAY from AI and towards housing? You can't tell people they're not allowed to invest in the thing that they think is gonna make them the most money.

Put differently, it is easy to say "there should be more investment in X and more in Y" but it takes concrete incentives to change that behavior.

Fro example, if you have a 401(K) or some other investments, should YOU be forced to redirect that into housing?

	▲	jstanley 19 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> what is your concrete plan to incentivize investment AWAY from AI and towards housing? I don't have one and don't think trying to nudge people this way is a good thing to do. > You can't tell people they're not allowed to invest in the thing that they think is gonna make them the most money. Exactly. > "there should be more investment in X and more in Y" I'm not the one saying that, you are!