| I agree with the sentiment but it's legally and politically untenable in the US (edit: to use eminent domain) Singapore was able to build out the HDB because it was a One Party State that didn't take kindly to activists. For example, when the HDB program was being built out, there was massive resistance by the people living in the villages used to build those HDBs. Those villagers often leaned socialist (Barisal Sosialis), and that party was largely neutered under emergency acts [0] with trade unionists and party activists being sent to Chaangi Jail indefinitely, along with protests and conspiracy theories about the ruling party burning down Kampongs/Villages to force residents to move into HDBs [1] While this in hindsight was the right move, the cost is VERY HIGH. The point is, redevelopment while caring for human rights and property laws is HARD. If you are a One Party State that can jail pesky activists willy nilly and owns all the newspapers, it's possible. But this is not how America works, and sure as hell not California. [0] - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Coldstore [1] - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bukit_Ho_Swee_fire |
There's absolutely no reason we in the Anglosphere couldn't emulate the HDB system and bringing up cold war incidents from 60 years ago isn't really relevant at all to how it works on the ground today.
Tangentially: Singaporean HDB owners have been harping on about oversupply for years now and the government is foolishly listening to those with a clear vested bias for increasing their own asset prices: https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/govt-careful-calibrati...