Biden Has Fully Embraced YIMBYs and Will Lose Suburban Voters

[Anonymous]

Fertility rates are below replacement level in basically every western country and they are continuing to decline. Pretty much every country in the world (97% of them) will have below replacement level fertility rates by 2100. Global population is expected to start declining (as early as 2050s or 2060s) well before 2100. We need to be careful not to over correct on zoning reform or our descendants will be burdened with a bunch of infrastructure that is not economically viable to maintain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Fertility rates are below replacement level in basically every western country and they are continuing to decline. Pretty much every country in the world (97% of them) will have below replacement level fertility rates by 2100. Global population is expected to start declining (as early as 2050s or 2060s) well before 2100. We need to be careful not to over correct on zoning reform or our descendants will be burdened with a bunch of infrastructure that is not economically viable to maintain.

Ironically its the SFH home suburb attached to a central city via a highway that is not economically viable. You should see just how expensive maintaining plumbing/electrical/sewerage/roads to low density suburbs actually is compared to the low taxable value of the land.

Densifying closer in land is much cheaper in the long run. Less total infrastructure and a stronger tax base.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fertility rates are below replacement level in basically every western country and they are continuing to decline. Pretty much every country in the world (97% of them) will have below replacement level fertility rates by 2100. Global population is expected to start declining (as early as 2050s or 2060s) well before 2100. We need to be careful not to over correct on zoning reform or our descendants will be burdened with a bunch of infrastructure that is not economically viable to maintain.

Ironically its the SFH home suburb attached to a central city via a highway that is not economically viable. You should see just how expensive maintaining plumbing/electrical/sewerage/roads to low density suburbs actually is compared to the low taxable value of the land.

Densifying closer in land is much cheaper in the long run. Less total infrastructure and a stronger tax base.

All of this, 100%

Also

Look at all the blue areas in the middle of the heavy carbon red areas. Suburban development is the MOST wasteful in human history.
https://coolclimate.org/maps

[Anonymous]

https://wtop.com/business-finance/2024/03/11-of-dc-homebuyers-are-investors-is-that-good-or-bad/

Recent wtop piece on investors buying houses in dc.

[Anonymous]

https://www.housingfinance.com/news/blackstone-acquires-assets-in-huge-aig-housing-portfolio_o

Blackstone bought luxury homes in DC. A lot.

I don’t want to out myself, but I know they were approaching homeowners directly even when their properties weren’t listed. They were trying to buy up entire streets and neighborhoods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fertility rates are below replacement level in basically every western country and they are continuing to decline. Pretty much every country in the world (97% of them) will have below replacement level fertility rates by 2100. Global population is expected to start declining (as early as 2050s or 2060s) well before 2100. We need to be careful not to over correct on zoning reform or our descendants will be burdened with a bunch of infrastructure that is not economically viable to maintain.

Ironically its the SFH home suburb attached to a central city via a highway that is not economically viable. You should see just how expensive maintaining plumbing/electrical/sewerage/roads to low density suburbs actually is compared to the low taxable value of the land.

Densifying closer in land is much cheaper in the long run. Less total infrastructure and a stronger tax base.

Even Doug burgum - a super Republican gov from North Dakota - has spoken about this

And ND is all about sprawl

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Biden admin (in the Council of Economic Advisors report) recently announced support for a host of key YIMBY policy initiatives this week, like eliminating single-family zoning, reducing minimum lot sizes, and eliminating parking minimums a few days ago. These reforms may be popular among policy wonks, but it remains to be seen whether this will be helpful (or harmful) for Biden's election prospects among suburban voters in key swing states. There has been broad pushback against these initiatives in many states that do not neatly align with traditional partisan politics. Is this a good idea or bad idea for the Biden Admin to discuss addressing this issue so close to the 2024 election?

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/ERP-2024.pdf
The zoning reform discussion starts on page 163 for people that want to read it.

I didn't read all the replies, but zoning is strictly a local matter isn't it? What power does the do feds have to determine zoning and lot sizes?

[Anonymous]

wow , if Fairfax would let me subdivide my lot, it'd be worth a fortune to developers. Not sure this is a bad idea

[Anonymous]

Multifsm housing works in Switzerland, Germany, Japan, and Singapore because there is massive social pressure to tattle/conform and otherwise behave

In Anglo countries, individualism is considered supreme so there is no social or state coercion to behave and hence muktifsm housing is annoying to live in

YIMBYs never want to talk about the social/state pressure required to make everyone behave better

There is a reason why living in a multifam in Tokyo or Zurich or Munich is ok but then you try in dc and it sucks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:wow , if Fairfax would let me subdivide my lot, it'd be worth a fortune to developers. Not sure this is a bad idea

It’s not

People are rent seekers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Y’all complain about the homeless crisis.
Y’all complain about a housing shortage.
Y’all complain about proposed solutions.
Rinse and repeat.

This is actually more horrific than the problem, though. Right now, I walk past the homeless on my way to my office in the urban core of a city. You're suggesting that we should ship them off to neighborhoods. No. People aren't homeless due to housing shortage. They are homeless due to substance abuse and mental illness. This isn't a solution for that problem. It makes the problem more potent.

There are people who are homeless because, despite having jobs, they cannot afford housing where they work or close to it, so they live in their car or in a tent. Yes, this does actually happen. If there were MORE housing where the jobs where, the relative cost would come down, you know, supply and demand.

And yes, there are also significant mental health and substance abuse issues. The GOP has NO solution or proposed legislation around those issues.

Well, one thing is for sure.....
The GOP is not trying to force the mentally ill and drug addicted homeless into suburban neighborhoods.
That is a Democratic policy.

What is the Republican solution?

It was basically saying no to immigration.


Those ships have sailed though, so right now its "make it someone else's problem." Which is also the Democrat's solution.

Immigration is not the cause of homelessness, but it sure makes a great bogeyman, right?

An increase in population increases the competition for housing which increases the cost of housing. No everyone who is homeless has mental/substance abuse issue - some individuals/families just can't afford the current cost of housing.

Population growth is placing huge pressure across all of society. Immigration is not helping. Illegal immigration is taking up taxpayer funds and services meant for U.S. citizens.

It may not be PC to state the obvious, but it is no less obvious. The emperor is naked, but nobody wants to state the obvious.

Illegal workers pay into the system via phantom social security numbers that never get collected after they are 65 and by sales tax and other fees they pay just by being in the country. They often will live with family; they aren't taking up space that would otherwise be used by someone here legally. They are sleeping on couches or floors of people already here.

Tell that to the New Yorkers who have to foot the bill to house, feed, and clothe illegals in a city that has a huge homelessness problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Multifsm housing works in Switzerland, Germany, Japan, and Singapore because there is massive social pressure to tattle/conform and otherwise behave

In Anglo countries, individualism is considered supreme so there is no social or state coercion to behave and hence muktifsm housing is annoying to live in

YIMBYs never want to talk about the social/state pressure required to make everyone behave better

There is a reason why living in a multifam in Tokyo or Zurich or Munich is ok but then you try in dc and it sucks

This is such BS. It is the same as saying that biking as a mode of transportation works in Europe and Asia but not the US because, reasons.

It is all about leadership. Do we want to continue the failed sprawl of the 20th Century or shift to something else that virtually the entire rest of the world does? Because what we are doing here is unsustainable from a landuse standpoint.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Multifsm housing works in Switzerland, Germany, Japan, and Singapore because there is massive social pressure to tattle/conform and otherwise behave

In Anglo countries, individualism is considered supreme so there is no social or state coercion to behave and hence muktifsm housing is annoying to live in

YIMBYs never want to talk about the social/state pressure required to make everyone behave better

There is a reason why living in a multifam in Tokyo or Zurich or Munich is ok but then you try in dc and it sucks

This is such BS. It is the same as saying that biking as a mode of transportation works in Europe and Asia but not the US because, reasons.

It is all about leadership. Do we want to continue the failed sprawl of the 20th Century or shift to something else that virtually the entire rest of the world does? Because what we are doing here is unsustainable from a landuse standpoint.

There is some truth to what this person is saying. Americans frankly are not as considerate towards their neighbors as other places. In Japan and South Korea, at least there is some social pressure for people to behave well. In the US, not so much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.housingfinance.com/news/blackstone-acquires-assets-in-huge-aig-housing-portfolio_o

Blackstone bought luxury homes in DC. A lot.

I don’t want to out myself, but I know they were approaching homeowners directly even when their properties weren’t listed. They were trying to buy up entire streets and neighborhoods.

For what purpose?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Multifsm housing works in Switzerland, Germany, Japan, and Singapore because there is massive social pressure to tattle/conform and otherwise behave

In Anglo countries, individualism is considered supreme so there is no social or state coercion to behave and hence muktifsm housing is annoying to live in

YIMBYs never want to talk about the social/state pressure required to make everyone behave better

There is a reason why living in a multifam in Tokyo or Zurich or Munich is ok but then you try in dc and it sucks

This is such BS. It is the same as saying that biking as a mode of transportation works in Europe and Asia but not the US because, reasons.

It is all about leadership. Do we want to continue the failed sprawl of the 20th Century or shift to something else that virtually the entire rest of the world does? Because what we are doing here is unsustainable from a landuse standpoint.

There is some truth to what this person is saying. Americans frankly are not as considerate towards their neighbors as other places. In Japan and South Korea, at least there is some social pressure for people to behave well. In the US, not so much.

I’m willing to upzone the entire country if the us is willing to institute Singaporean drug use laws, littering laws, and public nuisance laws, and East Asian level surveillance in public areas

And also a japanese “metabo tax”