> Housing is literally exclusively a supply and demand problem. If you want rent to go down, allow more building. End of story.
Uh, no? Suburbs reaching further out, without the infrastructure to support them, are not a happy ending. High risers in the wrong places cause infrastructure overload too. Putting high risers in the right places will ruin someone's vista. Hardly unsolvable, but far from "just build more".
> Uh, no? Suburbs reaching further out, without the infrastructure to support them, are not a happy ending.
So cap how far out you can build. Generally, of course, that already exists.
> High risers in the wrong places cause infrastructure overload too.
More houses means more residents means more jobs means more tax revenue. This revenue can then be plowed into shoring up the infrastructure to fit. That's what a city is.
> Putting high risers in the right places will ruin someone's vista.
And that sucks for them, but they've no right to a view.
Uh, no? Suburbs reaching further out, without the infrastructure to support them, are not a happy ending. High risers in the wrong places cause infrastructure overload too. Putting high risers in the right places will ruin someone's vista. Hardly unsolvable, but far from "just build more".