More Americans are forced to "reside" in their vehicles

In California, many businesses are renting plastic toilets; in order to keep the human waste off of their property.

It's not a solution. They're doing what they are able to do. They're coping with the situation.

 

A stroke of the pen; by the zoning comission.

Also, I think you misread my post. I never said anything about the rezoning being "automatic".

 

So, failing businesses are rezoned as residential; who owns these new residentials?

 

Not "failing", failed.

Whomever buys them.

 

Its the Federal Reserve we should be thanking. Not congress or Obama's administration.

 

A new order of management might start things to get better. I will say most of the west coast cities are off my radar to visit.

 

People, that is why I hate Democrats (commies).

The construction costs on a 2000 square foot house vs. 600 square feet, is a huge difference. Plus one has to consider reconstruction costs vs. fair market value, the difference between business and residential respectively; when that lying sack of human filth Democrat Zig Zag Zell reappraised property to LIE, and say he lowered taxes, my property tax went up 26%, but the store (of a millionaire) next door went up none.

Now the commies want to force people to build big so they can complain about big costs and then redistribute.

 

That's the issue. The normal person doesn't have the funds to buy them, and thus, you simply perpetuate the land owner/serf dichotomy. Renting and owning are two distinct markets, and I am failing to see how more rental properties in the hands of those who already own the most helps others out by reducing prices for those wanting to buy.

My concern overall is wealth accumulation via land ownership. I don't believe your solution helps attain that goal.

 

The ****? I don't care who you hate or why you hate them; not exactly sure why anyone would give a **** what you feel or how you feel them.

I am far from a commie.

No one wants anyone to "build big."

****ing learn how to read.

 

You are setting additional conditions.

Why would any new housing units, thus created, be required to be rental units?

The subject of the thread is the shortage of affordable housing.

There is certainly the opportunity for you to create a thread on the subject of wealth creation through affordable real-estate transactions.

 

"We need controls on what top earners are paid, and more even distribution at the lower end." (commie)

 

Once a city is hemmed in to the point where it cannot do additional annexations, once a city has filled all the available land, the only way to grow the operating funds from property taxes is to exert control to make the modestly and poorly housed folks go away, and the rich able to afford the high taxes on expensive improvements and high rises, come to stay.

City governments are not benevolent.

 

Of course we need controls. That's not communist, it's common sense.

You have nothing relevant to say, so until you have a point, pound sand.

 

They are either going to have to go Japanese, those tiny living modules, or high speed rail...fifty miles away to the suburbs...

 

"No one wants anyone to 'build big.'" The zoning requirements of the majority of gubermints, in just about every State, prove irrefutably that statement is untrue.

 

Who determines when someone has enough money and anything over that needs to be taken away and given to someone else, Comrade? You? Some other Socialist puke?

 

In the process of annexation per se, the people who are annexed do not get to vote on it (I've never heard of any). The city bases its action upon evil at that point.

 

Your rhetoric is duly noted.

The reality is that profits are not shared nor is salary bargaining a thing, and, salaries have not grown enough.

If it were up to me, CEO's would have a capped salary and zero bonuses. Those go to the employees.

 

I don't care what zoning says. I want land ownership to be affordable so all people in this nation can build wealth.

 

Fair market value of land is directly related to both location and surrounding improvements on land. The "highest and best use" frequently deprives the "******" woman of her house so the Atlanta braves are cursed for decades. That is why one cow pasture in metro Atlanta had their property taxes go up 200% with Zig Zag Zell's mill rate decrease, both location and surrounding improvements, his cows could not possibly be worth enough to pay it. Land ownership is affordable, the location of your dreams may not be affordable.

 

I don't care about "locations of dreams". The issue is that even locations that are absolute **** are overpriced.

 

Good thing it isn't up to you, Comrade.

 

It ought to be. This country would be a better place.

 

This country would be Venezuela if you had any power, Comrade.

 

I'm no communist, sorry. You can insinuate all you like. I simply think the top folks are paid entirely too much, and republican GRANDSTANDING about the economy is misguided, obfuscated bullshit, that does not paint a REAL picture for the majority of americans.