This doesn’t contradict Wei’s point, since he does include:
my guess is that a lot of the reasons people give in public for their opposition to housing are not their actual reasons.
And in fact, those two facebook posts (and most NIMBYism) can be read in the “uninsured risk” light—even if they don’t own land, they face risk of loss of life-quality if their now-comfortable spaces change very much.
Do you have a better approach to an ITT for those opposed to development?
Reading people’s comments, it’s very common for people opposing allowing market rate housing to object because they think it will make the area more expensive.
There’s probably (at least) something to that idea. I imagine commercial construction is similarly constrained as residential. It’s pretty common to hear that commercial rents are high in the places where residential rents are too.
This doesn’t contradict Wei’s point, since he does include:
And in fact, those two facebook posts (and most NIMBYism) can be read in the “uninsured risk” light—even if they don’t own land, they face risk of loss of life-quality if their now-comfortable spaces change very much.
Do you have a better approach to an ITT for those opposed to development?
Reading people’s comments, it’s very common for people opposing allowing market rate housing to object because they think it will make the area more expensive.
There’s probably (at least) something to that idea. I imagine commercial construction is similarly constrained as residential. It’s pretty common to hear that commercial rents are high in the places where residential rents are too.