[nine_zeros]

Why is this the only other option? How about removing rent controls and other regulations around building smaller low cost units and then charging a 15% vacancy tax on any unit that is empty for 3 months?

This way we are increasing supply and not encouraging hoarding.

[inetsee]

"regulations around building smaller low cost units";

I think this is a fundamental problem for dealing with low cost housing issues. Many cities have building regulations mandating minimum sizes for apartments, and requirements for a minimum number of parking spaces, even for apartment complexes close to public transportation. This makes it impossible for builders to build low cost housing. The problem of low cost housing has been around for a long time; the pandemic is just making it a much bigger problem.

Unfortunately, building an apartment complex takes time, and if the pandemic crisis is resolved (for some definition of resolved) in a year or 18 months, the low cost housing problem will just go back to what it was before the pandemic.

[danaris]

I mean, to some extent, what you're saying is, "Cities require apartments to be better than prison cells, and it's hard to make massive profits making genuinely livable housing that can be provided to people who don't make much money."

Which...yeah, the purpose of low-income housing should be to provide housing that people can still thrive in, no matter their income, not to make massive profits for the real estate or construction companies.

The cities themselves should be footing the bill to make sure their people are well-cared-for. It's already been proven in multiple instances to cost less than dealing with homelessness and its consequences, even if the people they're providing housing for can't pay a single cent (at first).