You're aware that zoning regulation is consistently correlated with more expensive housing, lower job growth, and greater homelessness, right?
Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. 30, No. 1 (Apr., 1987) contains: The Interjurisdictional Effects of Growth Controls on Housing Prices Lawrence Katz and Kenneth T. Rosen pp. 149-160 (12 pages)
Do the zoning boards want to help, or do they want things to be better? Cause they can't have both.
"Don't feed bears" is a rule *everywhere*, not just at campgrounds. Feeding the homeless isn't how you make things better, that's "helping". It's really very nice that there are people willing to feed the homeless, but that's not how you reduce their numbers, or really make life better for the existing homeless. You reduce their numbers and make their lives better by improving the economic situation as a whole. And that, you do by liberalizing the marketplace. If the minimum wage were lower, they could find jobs. If the housing restrictions (zoning among them) were easier, they could find homes. for those that have no capabilities, the more those like you can earn, and the fewer people you have to support, the better standard you can support them. Consider all the people at your soup kitchen, would you do any less if there were 1/4 the number of people? What would that effort accomplish for 1/4 the "clients"?
Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. 30, No. 1 (Apr., 1987)
contains: The Interjurisdictional Effects of Growth Controls on Housing Prices
Lawrence Katz and Kenneth T. Rosen
pp. 149-160 (12 pages)
http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndjlepp/vol4/iss2/7/
Do the zoning boards want to help, or do they want things to be better? Cause they can't have both.
"Don't feed bears" is a rule *everywhere*, not just at campgrounds. Feeding the homeless isn't how you make things better, that's "helping". It's really very nice that there are people willing to feed the homeless, but that's not how you reduce their numbers, or really make life better for the existing homeless. You reduce their numbers and make their lives better by improving the economic situation as a whole. And that, you do by liberalizing the marketplace. If the minimum wage were lower, they could find jobs. If the housing restrictions (zoning among them) were easier, they could find homes. for those that have no capabilities, the more those like you can earn, and the fewer people you have to support, the better standard you can support them. Consider all the people at your soup kitchen, would you do any less if there were 1/4 the number of people? What would that effort accomplish for 1/4 the "clients"?
Reply
Leave a comment