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.
You realize places with highly restricted zoning, Nimbyism and enviomentalist that stop growth are generally liberal right?
Got a cite? Liberals and conservatives largely agree on using zoning to exclude poor people, I find it to be largely driven by class rather than by political ideology.
Those who work for and pay for the perks should have them. If you don't work to achieve, (or perhaps don't win the lottery) then you're not entitled to the benefits.
That is what HOA is for - not the job of government.
No, another conservative who has worked hard and pulled himself up out of poverty to accomplish what he has, with no interest in handing the fruits of his labors to someone who has not worked equally hard to achieve it.
I was born in the shadow of a mill and watched my dad work himself to death in that mill. He forbade me to ever get a job there and insisted I go to college and work towards a better life. My wife arrived in this country with $50 in her pocket and a carryon bag. We now have multiple grad degrees, a beautiful home, luxury cars, and can send our child to a private school. It took a long time and a lot of hard work to accomplish this. So you think I should welcome low income townhouses built a block away so I can share our neighborhood pool with a bunch of ghetto rats?
Success is available for anyone willing to put in the effort. Those who are too lazy to do so can starve (literally for all I care). I'll sleep well either way.
No thank you. Not only will crime skyrocket, but so will my property taxes since low income people can't pay their fair share to educate their children. This is just a scam to take wealth from white people.
So low-income childless law-abiding adults should be excluded just like the bums?
Just end zoning, or water it down. In particular, end minimum lot sizes and weaken R-1 zoning, so it becomes easier to convert SFRs into multiple units.
Increasing the supply is the best way to lower the cost and promote accessibility.
Sorry, the top-down class warfare crowd would never agree to it.
But should government artificially increase the price by restricting supply?
Lack of land in urban areas decreases supply. Some cities, such as New York, San Francisco or LA cannot grown outward. It is very expensive to grow upward.
Home prices are very low in certain metropolitan areas because growth outward is unlimited.
I am wondering why low income housing in metropolitan areas is garunteed?
Well, the problem with your position is that there are no segregated neighborhoods.
Segregation is an institutionalized separation of people by some arbitrary criteria.
It is illegal in the United States of America, in the year of our Lord, 2013.
There may be stratified neighborhoods, but they are like that entirely through private association and choice of residence, economic similarities, and local institutions or features(such as the presence of a university, which may account for a young population).
What you mislabel segregation is simply the natural work of free people living freely.
Is that a bad thing?
It's building codes as well. If a community was determined to have socio-economic diversity, as some planned communities do, then there would be a mixture of rental and home-ownership, small and large houses in one area. There are areas like this in some cities that have developed naturally.
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.