[DoreenMichele]

Let me try this one more time and then I give up:

You: "Let's throw a bunch a people off a cliff and then assess who is worth saving afterwards!"

Me: "Let's stop throwing people off a cliff. If we stop doing that, we can stop arguing about who is too broken to save and whether or not it's a personal character defect that they ended up more broken than others who got thrown off the same cliff."

[mistercheph]

And then everyone clapped.

Me: "Thanks guys!"

[seanmcdirmid]

You didn’t even read my comment, so I give up. Ok, everyone just come to Seattle for their affordable housing, because DoreenMichele doesn’t want to think about the problem and would rather just throw half baked solutions at it.

[alephnullshabba]

Oh you don't understand? It's simple--BC's lawmakers were presented with the option of either making housing affordable nationwide or criminalizing drug use in their city. Darn lawmakers always picking wrong!

[seanmcdirmid]

Housing is affordable in many cities where people don’t want to live, at least in the states. If everyone wants to live on the west coast though, is it even possible to just make housing more affordable on one place until everyone lives there? If not, it basically means you induce more demand with lower home prices, so you wind up trying to fit a hundred million people in a few big metros.

Lawmakers can’t magic up affordable housing, especially at the federal level. I get people have crazy ideas, but this is the craziest. We could do what Singapore or Austria does with a residency system, though, but progressives don’t like that either.

[alephnullshabba]

Hope it was obvious but I was being sarcastic. Suggesting we simply "fix housing" is akin to suggesting we just "eradicate poverty" when confronted with widespread, immediate famine.

[seanmcdirmid]

Eh, either way my comment would have been the same. This is a wicked problem in the classic sense.