[cycrutchfield]

Are you aware that there exists a third dimension?

[MrOwnPut]

No, and I guess you're the only one, please go inform the architects of your original idea.

We could call them tallrises, skytouchers or something like that.

You said: "Might be an easier solution than upending property rights entirely."

My point was that land is owned by someone already, skyscraper or not.

So if you want to force people to make highrises, you will have to take their land. Good luck with that.

Alternative: don't crowd all into one city, there's plenty of land and many jobs can be remote now.

[cycrutchfield]

Land is owned almost everywhere in the US. The point is if regulations on density are relaxed then denser housing will be built. You don’t need to take anybody’s land. Invisible hand of the market and all that.

[MrOwnPut]

Find a plot in New York City that isn't owned. If the owner isn't building housing, what makes you think new regulations will make them?

How much denser would you like the new regulations to be btw? Do you know the current density?

[cycrutchfield]

A plot zoned for greater residential density will be worth more. There would be an economic incentive to build more housing.

Do you think that NYC in its entirety is dense enough?

[MrOwnPut]

I asked you the current regulation density and what your desired adjustment would be.

I assume you knew since you were advocating loosening the restriction. What's the restriction?

How much more dense should it be in your suggestion?

Until it's decided, no one can proceed with your idea right?