• yeather@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    29
    ·
    10 months ago

    That would also involve moving to less expensive areas where the pay is good and cost of living is lower. Not everyone that lives in the bay area should live in the bay area.

    • toiletobserver@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      What solution would you like to see that resolves the pay to rent gap? I’m pretty sure cities need the trades people, we’re just haggling over “how” now.

      • yeather@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        20
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Poor people cannot afford the city, if wages rise so will rents and other products in turn, leading to overregulation and strangles on the market until landlords would rather have empty homes than deal with tenants.

        • JamesTBagg@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          Landlords are already leaving housing empty rather than lower rents. Perhaps heavy handed regulations are needed because unfettered capitalism isn’t offering any solutions.

          • yeather@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            10 months ago

            Houses are going empty precisely because people are still submitting applications and attempting to live in them. The landlords are waiting for the perfect tennant instead of accepting the ten substandard ones rn. The market will either adjust or these landlords will lose out on revenue streams.

    • Apathy Tree@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      So wait, is anyone supposed to be left there other than the few well off people who can already afford it comfortably??

      How do you expect that not to immediately collapse?

      • yeather@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        10 months ago

        That’s the point, the people doing the work move away, the market falls to a level people can live in the city, everything balances out again. The only issue would be making sure the people stay away and the issue doesn’t happen again.

        • Apathy Tree@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          But that’s not what would happen because the people who can’t afford to live there are mostly the people who make society function.

          You can’t have a working city without the people at the bottom. So what you are proposing is that the city should collapse.

          Rather than, you know… just making sure people can afford to live there instead…

          • yeather@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            10 months ago

            The city won’t collapse, the rich that want to live in the bay will see to it. The whole point is there’s an overabundance of people that want to live in the same area, if the leftovers move to cheaper areas away from the bay than the housing crisis will be less impacted as a whole and prices will begin to fall.