How exactly would this change housing issues in neoliberal nyc and la? Your blood lust for progressives after the election loss is interesting tl say the leastThey shouldn’t have power in 100% of them.
How exactly would this change housing issues in neoliberal nyc and la? Your blood lust for progressives after the election loss is interesting tl say the leastThey shouldn’t have power in 100% of them.
We need to get interest groups and activists away from policy-making when it comes to infrastructure.How exactly would this change housing issues in neoliberal nyc and la? Your blood lust for progressives after the election loss is interesting tl say the least
I’m a Sam Seder fan but Ezra took him to task in this “debate”.entire segment was Ezra not wanting to upset his wealthy donors and instead blaming this mythical democrat in every us city to rebrand reaganomics agenda.he goes fron well im talking about specifically California then when sam talks about using it at a macro level accross the country he states " well we have to look at it from a microscopic perspective for each municipal"
so is it only regulations to blame or no? No special interest? Corporate democrats kill me with juelzing aroujd blaming corporations and donors
![]()
What was mr Seders response??I’m a Sam Seder fan but Ezra took him to task in this “debate”.
Simple questions, why wouldn’t the builders lobby want to build more housing in California and NY?
Why is it so expensive for the government to build housing?
Something convoluted. It’s an interesting debate, it shows the liberal/leftist divide. Liberals are focused on realistic solutions while leftists are stuck in idealismWhat was mr Seders response??
When you say ny I assume you mean nyc because all of ny isnt expensive for government housing in fact that's sams point comparing two expensive land masses to a cheap undeveloped land mass in Texas is dumb. The cost of land alone in NYC is way too expensive for cheap government housing, unless the government is forcing investors to sell at a significant loss which would be unfair completely to investors which ezra agrees with. Government housing doesn't have to be concentrated in nyc, theirs an entire state of metros in ny that could use government housing that would benefit everyone in the state. It's much more expensive to build on developed land that are already owned by entities then to build in the middle of a desert or farm land like Florida/texas for example.I’m a Sam Seder fan but Ezra took him to task in this “debate”.
Simple questions, why wouldn’t the builders lobby want to build more housing in California and NY?
Why is it so expensive for the government to build housing?
So you’re saying the building industry isn’t building housing because they don’t want to?When you say ny I assume you mean nyc because all of ny isnt expensive for government housing in fact that's sams point comparing two expensive land masses to a cheap undeveloped land mass in Texas is dumb. The cost of land alone in NYC is way to expensive for for government housing, unless the government is forcing investors to sell at a loss which would be unfair completely to investors which ezra agrees with. Government housing doesn't have to be concentrated in nyc, theirs an entire state of metros in ny that could use government housing that would benefit everyone. It's much more expensive to build on developed land that are owned by entities then to build in the middle of a desert or farm land like Florida for example.
Yes that is correct the building industry isnt building housing becauseSo you’re saying the building industry isn’t building housing because they don’t want to?
Ezra has it right IMO. The problem isn’t corporations, the problem is that corporations use the government instead of the government using corporations as a tool.
The right industries should be subsidized so that human greed can be used to fulfill our goals not the inverse.
Yes builders don’t build in high demand areas because they don’t want to make money. Stop it man apply Occam’s razor.Yes that is correct the building industry isnt building housing because
A. Profit margin wouldn't be desirable ( which is why corporation shouldn't be relied on)
B. They rather build in areas with cheap farm land or areas that have zero regulation that allows them to profit at exorbitant amounts
Ezra is wrong,regulations aren't the only problem when dealing with blue states, its disingenuous to compare anything to Chicago/nyc which already have significantly higher intrinsic values when it comes to property value. Let's get people outside of these supercities and build new super cities with cheaper land values ala austin 20 year ago. You have the entire state of ny Michigan other parts of Illinois etc that have the land mass or rundown properties that could be transformed into cheap housing. The focus on California which is expensive due to investors and nyc is disingenuous
High demand =/= profit margin. Glad you ignored the rest of my post. Good day sirYes builders don’t build in high demand areas because they don’t want to make money. Stop it man apply Occam’s razor.
There’s a series of competing interest when it comes to housing and the builders are the least powerful which is why they aren’t building
We’re talking about high demand areas then you bring up areas that are low demand, two completely different economic circumstances.High demand =/= profit margin. Glad you ignored the rest of my post. Good day sir
You asking why is it expensive to build public housing in fukking NYC which not only has lack of land and extremely high value property is stupid as it getsWe’re talking about high demand areas then you bring up areas that are low demand, two completely different economic circumstances.