The Real Reason Housing Is So Expensive by Second Thought
The Real Reason Housing Is So Expensive by Second Thought
You're viewing a single thread.
20 comments
-
That guy makes some crap videos.
Housing prices can be fixed with housing reform and breaking NIMBY, LVT and lowering immigration.
-
lowering immigration
Immigration isn't the problem with housing, and immigrants aren't a problem. So why put the blame on them? Are they 'poisoning the blood of our country' as certain people would say?
The only problem with immigration is that it's not easier to become documented, which creates a two-tier immigration system for the benefit of companies and detriment of workers.
Housing can be fixed with actually good public housing, rent caps, and removing zoning laws that prevent dense housing from being built.
-
Where do immigrants live in trees?
Oh course its going to increase any housing shortage.
There is a lot of problems with immigration. Immigration as a whole is different to certain immigration. If you break it down certain countries, certain jobs and certain education levels can cause a net drain on a country.
That's not to say all immigration is bad. But to think all immigration under any circumstance is good is just a signs of being brainwashed by their side and refusing to look at anything that goes against their view.
-
The problem with housing is not the demand. Housing is a necessity. Blaming a supply problem on demand does not make sense. The issue is with supply. I'm addition to the points I made earlier about making housing more affordable and available, workers are needed to build new housing. More job programs are the answer to that, not restricting immigration.
Immigrants across the board improve the economy and put more into welfare than they take out. So no, they are not a drain on the economy in any respect.
Please, share the negative effects of immigration. Because it isn't crime either. Immigrants are responsible for less crime per capita than US citizens. And the vast majority of drug trafficking is done by US citizens.
-
So how many people want to live in Manhattan? Bringing in more people will solve the housing issue?
More job programs are the answer to that, not restricting immigration.
Well we can agree on half of that.
Immigrants across the board improve the economy and put more into welfare than they take out. So no, they are not a drain on the economy in any respect.
This is the crux of it. This is the big lie here that is never backed up.
Break down immigration by country of origin, education, even income. Look at the results on lower classes and up classes, look at the affect on housing and jobs. It will not be an improvement across the board for all those things.
But I would love, love, love to see that data. But whenever it is shown it never shows what you claim it does.
Because it isn't crime either. Immigrants are responsible for less crime per capita than US citizens.
For every group?
Overall I 100% agree with you. That's what I would expect.
-
The 'Big Lie' is that Immigrants are bringing crime & drugs across the border, that they negatively impact the economy, and that they take away jobs from & lower wages of US Citizens. These are fabrications not based on any evidence and what the Republican party has run for for years. This is a nativist sentiment.
There is plenty of evidence that disprove those sentiments.
Other sources:
-
You just dropped a load of shit without explaining it.
But glancing at it it looks EXACTLY like the point I was making.
Generals and averages I agree immigration can be made to look good. When you go into the details things change. Where does it look at country of origin? Where does it show contributions over life rather than just prime age? Where do you see intergenerational affects? Where does it talk about training instead of filling gaps with foreigners ? Where does it talk about all these effects of different earning percentiles of the population?
When every people go into that level of details things look different.
Plus it doesn't all come down to money
-
I implore you to read more from the sources than just what I quoted. You're right that it's not all about money, Pro-immigration should come from a morality standpoint, not just economic. People are people, everyone deserves asylum. There is no reason to curb immigration from anywhere.
Why are you trying so hard to single certain people out as 'unworthy' of being allowed in as immigrants? You've provided no evidence that justifies it even from an economic standpoint. I'm sure you're not talking about any European or First World country, but instead some Third World Country. Of which those people aren't deserving of immigration to the US for some arbitrary reason. It's white nativism, which is a form of racism, whether you are aware or not. I'm going to assume you're not aware, which is why I linked the wiki about nativsm so you can see the history of this kind of sentiment and where it comes from.
-
I'm not going through your data dump. You just gisp galloping
Asylum is abused. We are talking economic immigrants here.
We need a data driven decision. Not listening to you who "know" things based on feels.
It's white nativism, which is a form of racism, whether you are aware or not
See you full of shit because I'm not. The issues with people from Hong Kong, or Japan or the pacific or actual asylum countries crossing their nearest board to get away rather than get to like Ukraine is fine. Even places like Nigeria show much better stats than others. Though total numbers are also important (with the exception of actual issues like Ukraine)
I would love data driven info. That's what the people want. But also things like culture are exceptionally important to people more so than even money and people should get a vote on it rather being told to accept people that hate homosexuals or treat women like second class citizens just so the ruling class can make more money from houses and cheap wages. You come to a country the least you can do is act like a member of that country.
-
All the sources I provided are data driven with empirical evidence
-
For the data I asked for or for the misleading data I mentioned?
You don't seem to understand my point even remotely. So the conversation is done.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
who builds the housing, trees?
-
Locals primarily.
-
sure, but if immigrants comprose 2% of the population and make up 5% of the housing workforce, they're still a net gain for housing
-
No. That's poor maths, you're comparing two entirely different things. This is why so so so many of the arguments and facts about immigration are in poor faith. People massively oversimplify.
-
-
-
-
All the houses where I live are being built by immigrants.
-
How many new houses are built by immigrants and how many immigrants are there?
They could built all the houses but absolute numbers matter not percentages.
-
-
-
-
He has nearly 2 million subscribers.
-
lol Logan Paul and Mr beast had more. case in point - subscribers does not mean intelligence or quality.
-
So anyone that has 2 million subscribers is automatically right on everything?
-
-
20 comments