Re:The Golden Girls Would Violate Zoning Laws
by jdoliner on Monday July 29, 2019 @03:37PM
(#20558517)
That's what I was getting at. Politician C is making an argument similar to what the original article is making. If you tried to make the D argument: I would make sure that your housing investment doesn't (I think that's what you meant) grow. The NYTimes would probably have no interest in publishing it, but for all intents and purposes it's the same argument with different optics.
I would even say that the alternatives have the same issue.
Politician C: I will make sure that housing remains affordable.
Politician D: I will make sure that your housing investment does grow.
But C is (loosely) the negation of B and D is (loosely) the negation of A. While there are other choices, the likely ones people vote are are the first group (A, B) verses the second group (C, D), normally with the options appearing in their nicer forms.
In short, affordable housing and having homes be worthwhile investments are at odds with each other in most issues.