Source- but beware, the site is cancer.

  • intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    7 months ago

    I mean if our zoning wasn’t so overly strict, those real estate holders could cash in on enormous rent prices by transforming that commercial space into apartments.

    Then there would be more housing supply, rents would go down, homelessness would improve, and those real estate holders would be able to get back to making profit, and there’d be less lying about the pros and cons of working from home.

    All of it could be better, through the mechanism of consensual mutual profit that we call the free market. If only the government weren’t constantly enforcing largely arbitrary rules about how this block can house people but that block can only be for offices.

    Keeping rendering plants away from preschools is fine. Arbitrarily telling people they can’t put beds and kitchens into a commercial space and let people live there is not.

    There’s profit being lost AND people going homeless because there is a third party constantly preventing us from making the deals that mutually improve our lives.

    And they’ve convinced you the real estate owners are the evil ones.

    • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      7 months ago

      Unfortunately the building codes for office and residential buildings are very different and it’s damn near impossible to convert many offices into residences.

      • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        That’s okay, I’ll take a whole floor with no showers or kitchen for a cheap price.

        It’s not hard, it’s just not profitable meaning they have to take a lost, you know, like everyone else who makes a bad investment.

        • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          7 months ago

          It doesn’t matter what you’ll “take”. It’s illegal to live in a building that doesn’t meet code for residential units. Stuff like natural light as well as adequate plumbing and ventilation are important.

          And they wouldn’t just be converting entire floors into single units. Those would be beyond luxury sizes. You think a 50 storey building can afford to become a 50-unit apartment? How is that going to solve our housing crisis? Don’t be dense.

          For a conversion to work, they would need to be able to convert every floor of an office building into sufficiently dense housing. But office buildings are typically laid out with very deep footprints, where much of the internal layout of the building is far from any sources of natural light. Humans need access to natural light, which is why it’s not legal to sell a unit where the main rooms don’t all have windows. That can’t be fixed without tearing down the building and building something new.

          • intensely_human@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            It’s illegal to live in a building that doesn’t meet code for residential units.

            Yes. The idea here is that relaxing those laws and allowing

            Stuff like natural light as well as adequate plumbing and ventilation are important.

            More important than having a roof over one’s head? A “free market” is when people make their own decisions about what’s important instead of the nanny state doing it for them.

            And they wouldn’t just be converting entire floors into single units.

            I guess if plumbing is an issue then you could get about as many units out of an office as bathrooms that the office floor could support.

            Humans need access to natural light

            Last time I stayed in a homeless shelter I had zero natural light. I was very, very happy to be inside, and nobody was forcing me to be there. I happily, eagerly, traded my natural light for shelter.

            Free. Market. Adults making their own choices. Humans do not, in fact, need natural light. And the fact that some building code makes that claim, does not make it an aspect of reality.

      • intensely_human@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Perhaps it’s still more profitable than letting a building sit there un-used. The market should be allowed to try.