[fierarul]

I find it interesting how affordable housing must be very near high economic opportunity.

Seems to me it's a fight for convenience too.

They built Las Vegas in the desert to avoid restrictions, what's preventing this generation to build new cities?

The whole Covid problem will make quests to increase population density more difficult. But perhaps will also spread opportunities around, or move them online, so this zoning struggle will stop being important.

[buss]

I fight for both market rate and subsidized housing in high-opportunity cities because it's the easiest way to life people out of poverty.

Being able to live near high-income jobs is the most direct path to the middle class in America. If we want people to not live in poverty, then it makes sense to subsidize their access to opportunity. That means subsidizing education and housing.

I've had fun nights talking with friends about starting a city. It's really fun to think about how we'd design the city to maximize opportunity, but there's no getting away from the value an existing city provides. Fixing a city with already high opportunity is just fundamentally cheaper than starting a city from scratch. All we need to do is win a few elections -- we're talking less than $100MM. A new city that is aiming to compete is a $100B+ project.

As engineers we often think the best way to fix something is to build a new version. But this is rarely true in institutions. Think of governments as legacy systems: they've been built up over time and have a ton of hacks keeping it running. Think of Spolsky's generally good advice: "Don't rewrite code" https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/04/06/things-you-should-...

It is easier to fix an old and broken system than to replace it wholesale. Let's focus on fixing government instead of replacing it.

[fierarul]

Education already is subsidised through state and private scholarships. And I believe rent is also capped in many places.

Seems a tautology that access to high-opportunity would help an individual. But if rent is too high as to be unaffordable, then the place is not so high-opportunity. Cost of living can't be excluded from the opportunity calculation.

I get that some sort of 'jump-start' in life might be required but can't help but feel that deep down this will hide a dysfunctionality somewhere.

Maybe something like Lambda Housing would prove this economical theory. Signing an ISA for subsidised housing if this proves to significantly raise the person's income seems a no brainer.

[pmarca]

"Being able to live near high-income jobs is the most direct path to the middle class in America." 100%