Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Progressive places tend to have one very damaging feature that over time makes it difficult for poor people to live - zoning laws.
Zoning laws seem to be a feature of democracy as people are able to democratically decide where and how resources are used. However since democracy can be inefficient and favor insiders, it seems that this may not be a great bargain for the poor.
It don't think of some conservative city as being a great place for poor people. But probably a middle ground. Conservative states seem to be winning the population argument most notably due to the fact that they do not use democracy to decide living arrangements - zoning laws.
Imagine if Houston could be in a better location. Maybe a blue state needs its own Houston. It just wouldn't have all of the oil & gas surrounding it, maybe they would have better environmental quality. Because if San Francisco were to ease up on its zoning, it would easily be the fastest growing region the in US. However it seems precisely the time where people are making lots of money in some regions, people are moving to others. If there was a better balance there probably wouldn't be so much inequality & other problems.
You're thoughts? Are zoning and progressives just a marriage that can never be broken? Is zoning necessarily a progressive issue or just specific cities? ...
Keep in mind, progressives tend to have more money and be well educated, which means there will be more money chasing real estate in progressive areas, pushing up the price of real estate. Conservative states are mostly inland states.
Keep in mind, progressives tend to have more money and be well educated, which means there will be more money chasing real estate in progressive areas, pushing up the price of real estate. Conservative states are mostly inland states.
This is true but I do not think this is a decisive factor. Anyone can see that Houston is also a very rich place. Oil and gas made tons of money when there was a boom and there was no corresponding boom & bust in Houston. I think if Houston had the kind of zoning as SF, it would be expensive as well. There are 6 million people apparently in the Houston area. Yet their housing prices are probably the lowest in any major metro area in the country. I think zoning is still by far the decisive factor.
Zoning is about managing development in a responsible way as to take into account burdens on traffic, utilities, and other government-provided services. Also, Houston also is not completely devoid of some form of zoning.
Forget What You’ve Heard, Houston Really Does Have Zoning (Sort Of) Forget What You
Quote:
“We do have a lot of land-use regulations,†Festa said. “We still have a lot of stuff that looks and smells like zoning.â€
Zoning is about managing development in a responsible way as to take into account burdens on traffic, utilities, and other government-provided services. Also, Houston also is not completely devoid of some form of zoning.
Forget What You’ve Heard, Houston Really Does Have Zoning (Sort Of) Forget What You
These restrictions are nothing in comparison to outright zoning laws. We all know this.
People have to live somewhere. If the zoning laws aren't loosened, it will continue to contribute to problems with inequality and poverty.
This is true but I do not think this is a decisive factor. Anyone can see that Houston is also a very rich place. Oil and gas made tons of money when there was a boom and there was no corresponding boom & bust in Houston. I think if Houston had the kind of zoning as SF, it would be expensive as well. There are 6 million people apparently in the Houston area. Yet their housing prices are probably the lowest in any major metro area in the country. I think zoning is still by far the decisive factor.
The Bay area is far, far more educated than Houston. Such a place on the coast can never be cheap.
Places like Baltimore and Chicago are not that expensive even with zoning.
The Bay area is far, far more educated than Houston. Such a place on the coast can never be cheap.
Places like Baltimore and Chicago are not that expensive even with zoning.
Supply & demand don't care about education. That is an excuse to get out of zoning regulations. Does oil & gas generate revenue or not? Clearly it has for a very long time. However Houston has not had the same problems. (Houston is on the coast too BTW) Economists have been pointing this out for quite some time.
SF is notorious for its zoning regulations. Not only SF but basically the entire bay area has the same issue. Places like Chicago and Baltimore don't have nearly the same rules.
I think these are clearly excuses to get out of the real issue. The zoning rules are doing exactly what they intend to do, restrict housing. That may be good for the residents, but bad for the larger population, bad for equality, bad for poorer people.
Supply & demand don't care about education. That is an excuse to get out of zoning regulations. Does oil & gas generate revenue or not? Clearly it has for a very long time. However Houston has not had the same problems. (Houston is on the coast too BTW) Economists have been pointing this out for quite some time.
SF is notorious for its zoning regulations. Not only SF but basically the entire bay area has the same issue. Places like Chicago and Baltimore don't have nearly the same rules.
I think these are clearly excuses to get out of the real issue. The zoning rules are doing exactly what they intend to do, restrict housing. That may be good for the residents, but bad for the larger population, bad for equality, bad for poorer people.
Its a minor issue. Maybe it would be 7% cheaper with some easing but its not a big deal. It would still be super expensive because of the highly educated workforce with high wages. There is lots of zoning in progressive cities like Chicago, Minneapolis, Baltimore etc. They are nowhere near as expensive as the Bay area.
Its a minor issue. Maybe it would be 7% cheaper with some easing but its not a big deal. It would still be super expensive because of the highly educated workforce with high wages. There is lots of zoning in progressive cities like Chicago, Minneapolis, Baltimore etc. They are nowhere near as expensive as the Bay area.
Making excuses... Just like when conservatives try to pin everything on taxes, people only hear what they want. Guess what, cities like Chicago aren't growing very quickly either. Guess which cities are the fastest growing? The southern ones like Texas. Why do people move there, overwhelmingly due to COL. SF just is terrible with zoning. Stop making excuses.
Supply and demand, not this, "because we are just so smart" nonsense.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.