Re:Why has regional income convergence in the U.S. declined?...
by flukus on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @10:05PM
(#14862112)
We have the same issue in Australia and it is very much a national issue. The problem with bubbles is that once they've begun and have enough people invested in them it becomes political suicide to deflate. You can't go to an election with a promise of reducing the value of the biggest asset most people will ever own. I doubt you can even win on a promise to stop it inflating further because most people have factored in future increases.
Ultimately I think trying to slow down or deflate the bubble might make things worse for more people than just letting it pop.
Re:Why has regional income convergence in the U.S. declined?...
by tdb7893 on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @03:44PM
(#14859523)
I've found that I prefer living in the Midwest and having an extra thousand or so a month for travel and stuff than living in a more hipster city.
Re:Why has regional income convergence in the U.S. declined?...
by mywittyname on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @05:30PM
(#14860552)
Midwestern cities are experiencing housing inflation too. Urban houses that were 140k five years ago are well over 200k now.
Re:Why has regional income convergence in the U.S. declined?...
by closeparen on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @08:29PM
(#14861649)
Intuitively it seems pretty rare for Midwesterners to live in cities or "urban" houses. Most of us seem to be in the metro areas, but in freeway-connected suburbs, not urban cores.
Re:Why has regional income convergence in the U.S. declined?...
by tdb7893 on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @09:37PM
(#14861974)
Yeah. I'm paying 1k a month for 1k square feet about 15 minutes from Minneapolis. When I want to do stuff in the city it's pretty easy to drive or use Lyft. I spend most of my time camping, playing board games, or doing martial arts and none of those are improved by actually living in a city so it makes little sense for me to live in one. Not everyone has the same hobbies so I understand if some people need cities but I talk to a lot of people who are paying 3k a month on the west coast and living a very similar life
Good question, but I think the answer is that it's simply not a national issue. In New York City, you can bet that it's a campaign issue across local politicians, and it's in the news weekly. Also, it's not true that one 'can't build' in NYC due to regulations. While there are regulations (as one would expect of a highly densely populated city), there's plenty of building. The price of land, however, is obscene.
Meanwhile, that $1M condo that's one bedroom apartment you purchased in Manhattan (in Manhattan it's probably small) or even the $800K 2 bedroom you purchased in Brooklyn (in a cheaper part of Brooklyn, like Bed Stuy or Bushwick), you could live like a Sheikh in a place like Omaha, NE or (perhaps) Dallas, TX.
Hotpots like SF, NYC, Boston and so on - the smaller, dense cities with jobs and no land left - no so much.
It's not a national issue. Everyone wants to live in California because you get nice weather, high salaries and cannabis edibles rain from the sky. You're a victim of your own success.