• Octavio@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    You know how California got sick of greedy companies ripping off people for insulin so now they’re going to sell insulin themselves at a reasonable price? Yeah, they should do that with apartments.

    • SippyCup@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      17 hours ago

      This literally happens in some areas outside the US. I can’t remember if it’s NotJustBikes or HappyTowns that talks about it on YouTube. But basically, the government offers affordable housing to force landlords to compete on quality and price. Shockingly in those areas rents are down and the quality of apartments is decent.

      • lemonwood@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Vienna, Austria is a classic example. Don’t know about the current situation, though.

    • ProbablyBaysean@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      15 hours ago

      I lived in a housing market like that. It was a college town dominated by a church subsidized school. The students had to live in on-campus, off-campus and registered, or unregulated housing. The only people allowed to do unregulated housing were those who had their stuff together e.g. married or living with family. Housing was cheap and any landlord disagreements could be complained against the uni housing office. The uni provided so much housing that prices were based on the uni’s low cost instead of anything higher. A friend from high school had her dad choose to “invest” by buying a small apartment building out there, but even with his daughter as manager, he didn’t make a good return because he didn’t have the scale to provide the minimum level of service. I think he sold it.

      Students there tended to get married and have children while still in school.

      Long story short, housing market regulation can be done via a dominating entity over demand, but non market forces are not common everywhere.

      • Batmorous@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        It will happen eventually just needs more people doing and more proper usage of funding. Can’t wait for upgrade from 39.5 million people to 200 million. Making it a full fledged country with amount of people to back it up. If California can develop in same Japan and South Korea do that would be awesome

      • Octavio@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        20 hours ago

        High speed rail such a great way to travel medium distances anyway it’s downright criminal the US hasn’t figured it out yet.

        • PeacefulForest@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          17 hours ago

          thank you I feel like I’m taking crazy pills when I think about this. It would revolutionize California. More affordable housing Central Valley with career opportunities in whichever city, less pollution, less car wrecks, likely to stimulate the economy.

          There is a reason Musk tried blocking the high speed rail from getting built- it’s so he can sell more cars CA is his biggest buyer, if the rail was built he would be saying goodbye to his foothold in CA.

          If you spend enough time in CA, it’s unbelievable how clear it is this rail needs to be built, and not in the next 30 years, we need it now

          • Batmorous@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 hours ago

            Let’s all keep doing more and getting more people active to get it done. We got this. Same thing for other states as well. With every state getting mid-range high speed rail. Then we can get bullet trains for long distances

        • RagingRobot@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          20 hours ago

          It would obviously allow people to live in cheaper committees and commute into the more expensive ones alleviating some of the issues.

          Why are you so defensive and mean about someone bringing that up? Seems like you might have some issues

        • mechoman444@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Yes but he said “high speed rail” which is popular here so now you’re getting downvoted.

          You’re right of course. It’s an idiotic take.

          It’s kinda like saying housing would be a lot better if there were more forest rangers.

          • qarbone@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            21 hours ago

            It’s kinda like saying housing would be a lot better if there were more forest rangers.

            How is that at all the same?

          • PeacefulForest@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            17 hours ago

            This is also and incredibly lazy comment. You don’t even point out why it’s an idiotic take, just somehow come up with that and then BAM! “Heh heh… you’re stuuuuuupid…. Heh heh”

            Morons…