It's funny how people suddenly fetishize density. I guess it's the trendy thing now. Y'all should move to Asia, where cities are a million times more densely populated than anywhere in the U.S. It sucks. Imagine, for example, a giant, 50-story apartment building -- like, the ugliest building you've ever seen. Now, imagine 40 of them all in the row, as far as you can see, and you don't even know which building is yours because they all look exactly the same. Compared to cities in Asia, Washington is gorgeous, all green and lovely and completely livable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you add enough units, prices will go down, at least in theory. In practice, all those units would be snapped up by the many people living in the suburbs who have terrible commutes into DC. There are hundreds of thousands of people who get up every day at 4am to avoid traffic or who sit in their car four hours a day. I suspect many of them would be willing to pay quite a bit to have a normal commute. Perhaps the up-zoning crowd could go buy their old places in Sterling or Bowie.

If that happened, that would be a good thing, wouldn't it? More people living closer, with shorter commutes, less driving, better air quality, fewer greenhouse gas emissions, etc.?

A lot of people want their tract home in the burbs with a quarter acre lawn. No amount of cheap condos is going to change that. This is the American Dream that almost everyone subscribes to.

Why are you even here? You clearly don't even live in D.C. No one has a quarter-acre lawn, except for the very rich, and there has never been a cheap condo built anywhere in the District.