basically by tying it to federal funding to force states to allow more housing to be built, which is how the federal government got the states to all raise their minimum drinking age to 21 in the 1980s.
We probably couldn’t use this method anymore because these days the courts absolutely do not allow the US government to do anything that could possibly be good. They would shut it down
something like 15,000 empty houses right now further more building brand new single family homes doesn’t empower the working class, it empowers landlords
something like 15,000 empty houses right now
This statistic is meaningless because many of the cities with excess housing are in places with no jobs
building brand new single family homes doesn’t empower the working class, it empowers landlords
This is incorrect. The important statistic to look at is vacancy rate In almost all the major cities in the US vacency rates are well below the tenant empowering 8% and many are below the 5% rate where tenant have a fighting chance. We absolutely need more housing. I’d prefer duplexes, triplexes, row houses and apartments for urbanist reasons, but the idea that building more houses empowers landlords over the proletariat is ridiculous.
how are those two issues even remotely similar
