You do realize that in the US most of your taxes are going to direct transfers to rich people right? The average recipient of social security has on average 9x the net worth of the average payer. What about that is about community? birth rates have collapsed and we are still shoveling money into the pockets of old rich people. Children live in poverty while the old live in decadence. No shit I don't want to contribute so that some old degenerate can spend my hard earned cash on another round of slots at the casino.
That crap house hasn't been updated and is worth 200x currently in California. Houses that sold for 10k in the mid 70s are selling for 2 million or more in 2025. Cars, appliances and everything else is just a rounding error by comparison.
That's a condemnation of zoning laws artificially restricting the market for housing, which ironically only came about after that period of relative abundance
I wouldn't recommend buying anything other than brand new cutters. People overpay for used junk. New cutters can be pricey, but you only buy what you need anyway.
Do you actually think the comment you replied to was complaining about requirements like central heat or bathrooms? NIMBYs will trot out every excuse and misdirection to avoid addressing the dire shortage of housing. This anti-growth mindset is a philosophy of death. I suspect that deep down, many want the world to end with them and are actually sabotaging efforts to solve societal issues out of some sort of Freudian death-drive.
What in the -- Freudian death drive? I'd wager it's far more simple: run of the mill selfishness. NIMBYs want to keep the gravy train flowing while they're here. Increased housing stock threatens the currently astronomical prices and returns. NIMBYs are "anti-growth" because their pocketbook demands it.
This isn't it. On the one hand, people acknowledge that transit resources, clean environment, water, electricity, don't grow on trees (and that trees are also nice). On the other hand, anyone who wants to control development at all is labelled as a NIMBY. Some of that is accurate, some of that is not. But I get it: you want your cake and you want to eat it also.
Tokyo definitely has places without (a) toilets in your apartment (you have access to one in the same building though) and (b) places without showers in building (you'll have to use a bathhouse). The lack of heat might be annoying to some people, and the insulation isn't going to be good enough to let your electric space heater work very well (so get used to using a kotatsu). Now, using a kotatsu isn't bad, but it isn't super convenient.
>Tokyo definitely has places without (a) toilets in your apartment (you have access to one in the same building though) and (b) places without showers in building (you'll have to use a bathhouse).
These are really old buildings. No one is building new housing units like this.
This is like judging places in America based on trailer homes made in the 1960s.
The net result of relaxing zoning would be more residential housing built, not industrial. Industrial parks around the united states are sitting fallow while housing is being bid up to the moon. Demolishing houses to build a dog food factory would be very unprofitable since you would be replacing high value land use with low value land use. What you are saying is not a good argument for strict zoning, because your hypothetical scenario isn't realistic.
