SF is one of the more egregious examples with the perfect storm of factors. Other cities with fewer factors driving the problem may not need a full public housing movement to solve their housing crises (as much as I, personally, think all housing should just be decommodified everywhere)

Because of the high cost of land, AND construction, AND insane local codes, sf has backed itself into a situation where, as far as I can tell, the only solution is for the government to start building, owning, and operating housing.

but in other cities the catch phrase MUST be “build more AFFORDABLE housing”. SF faces the conclusion you’ve drawn - because SF has rent control newly built housing is notably more expensive than older housing stock displacing families, lifelong residents, and decades old businesses.

(apparently Austin is an example of this - enough new housing has been built recently rents in new buildings actually went *down* for some)

It varies by city because city & state codes differ so wildly. in some cities, where there is obviously underdeveloped land or decaying buildings, and codes allow for relatively cheap construction, it really is simple as building more housing, even cheaply made but touted as “luxury” units.

It’s likely a lot of scalpers using bots unfortunately 😔

🫠🫠🫠

post whatever you want to your feed! if followers complain about too many reposts offer them the OnlyPosts feed: bsky.app/profile/did:...

i wanna ride the belly 🤤🤤🤤

woofwoofwoof i wanna be that toy

oh that last one i’ve already had my entire life ✨

yes! so nice to meet you too 😄