patrick.net

Good luck persuading CA bums to move to OR.

OR doesn't want them.

Just kick all the mother fuckers out, housing problem will shrink.

RC2006 says

OR doesn't want them.

They have plenty of their own.

Paywall, can you post the article?

Fuckyouasshole says

Paywall, can you post the article?

More of the same: 5-story highrise ADU in every backyard w/o asking the owners for permission, LOL.

From the paywall excerpt I could see, they're suggesting to increase housing supply by increasing density - by allowing up to 4 units per SFH residential plot.

Increasing density seems like it will reduce costs in the short term due to adding supply, but is it possible in the long term that it may eventually increase rental costs? I wonder because there seems to be this rule of thumb across the nation: high density city = expensive, suburbia w/ med density = med price, rural w/ low density = low price. This rule holds reasonably true across the nation, and especially in a given area (i.e., as you drive away from a city and density falls, so do prices).

I'm not positive, but I think the reason why dense areas are expensive is because people like to live among lots of other people, and when lots of people live in an area, jobs flourish, and so choices of amenities and services do too. You end up with lots of choices for things, and the choices end up being nearby too. All this seems to feedback making the area more enticing to people. Of course, some don't like big cities, but there's plenty that do.

So, will increasing density potentially eventually raise rent prices? Assuming the increased density doesn't destroy the city via exhaustion of services capacity (traffic, water, sewer etc...), or via mismanagement and crime etc..., I would think after a period of growth, you might end up w/ a similar level of scarcity of housing units. I'm not sure what metric would be used to measure scarcity of units aside from market prices, but maybe there's some other useful metrics.

Anyway, after time, it seems like those new units will fill up, and my gut tells me people will probably ultimately be willing to pay higher rents in a big dense city, vs a city w/ suburb density.

High, dry desert between Columbia River and Cali border has become an affluent flight area for the California flies who left their glorious California cistern with the big bucks to escape. Ironically, California State Pension Carpetbaggers are also moving to these areas. California is good enough to rob and grift, and destroy with taxes, regulations and insane policies, but not good enough to stay in.

Ceffer says

High, dry desert between Columbia River and Cali border has become an affluent flight area for the California flies who left their glorious California cistern with the big bucks to escape. Ironically, California State Pension Carpetbaggers are also moving to these areas. California is good enough to rob and grift, and destroy with taxes, regulations and insane policies, but not good enough to stay in.

California, and States like Ohio, should implement special taxes on pensions of state employee retirees who move out of state. That is, you pay California state taxes on the pension, plus any taxes of the last California locality where you resided, even if you run off to a place with low or no state/local taxes on pensions.

That has been illegal since 1996:

Maybe after Trump wins in 2020 and if the Repubs take back the house, this law can be changed.

OccasionalCortex says

Hircus says

I'm not positive, but I think the reason why dense areas are expensive is because people like to live among lots of other people, and when lots of people live in an area, jobs flourish, and so choices of amenities and services do too.

What you are describing is a lot like a variation of Jevon's Paradox to me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox

Yes, it does.

To expand on their coal analogy, they improved efficiency of turning coal into electricity, which you would think would drive a reduction in coal consumption because people would consume the same qty of electricity. But, the lower prices of electricity fueled an industry of electronic products, which eventually increased electricity demand greatly - to the extent people are willing to pay even more than ever for elec.

Likewise, added housing supply relieves price pressure, and affordable housing attracts people. New people build new businesses, amenities, and social opportunities. This makes the city more attractive, increasing housing demand - and people perhaps willing to pay more than ever for housing.

OccasionalCortex says

HeadSet says

Maybe after Trump wins in 2020 and if the Repubs take back the house, this law can be changed.

Why? Only the blue states really tax pensions like that. I plan on leaving the state when I start to draw down my 401k/IRAs.

Does not apply to people taking IRA/401k. This is for State workers who have a large State pension and move out of the high tax State to avoid paying the high taxes they helped cause.

Those fleeing pensioners go to lower tax states...almost all of which are Red States (Washington State is a famous counterexample but probably won't be in 20 years). They bring their pension money with them.

True, they bring the pension money, but also bring their politics.

Did California run out of, or ban cardboard boxes?