Comments
TheSausageKing t1_j39chzj wrote
Enjoyed it, but walked away scratching my head. It seems really disingenuous to heap accolades onto CHA while not even discussing Cambridge's insane housing prices or the "winners and losers" issue public housing creates.
thedude2024 t1_j3a9r00 wrote
Resident population prolly around 110k
Daytime population is over 250k
In 6 sq miles. The very definition of 10 lbs of shit in a 5 lb bag.
Hyperbowleeeeeeeeeee t1_j38qm6m wrote
A rather distinct narrative from the one typically offered on the topic of housing. Good article.
CriticalTransit t1_j3a73uc wrote
Independent professionally run services is one of the arguments in favor of our city manager system.
Unfortunately the article does not mention rent control and the fact that we’re a small part of a large region that mostly refuses to do anything meaningful on housing. Private landlords are mostly scum and need to be driven out of business with massive investment in social housing.
[deleted] t1_j390pbz wrote
[deleted]
CriticalTransit t1_j3a4wvg wrote
The idea of social housing is that if you have enough of it and it’s high quality, private landlords will have to compete. There is no modification or wealth generation happening when you’re struggling to stay afloat. If you can afford to buy a condo you’re still free to do that, but if not, at least you’d have a safe and functional place to live. I would support a policy of near universal public housing, just as I advocate for a single-payer universal healthcare system and for the same reasons. You could always buy your own house but for most people it wouldn’t be worth the extra cost. If you are against public housing, you support homelessness and destitution, plain and simple.
yesimon t1_j398z2q wrote
Do you know how to use “tl;dr”?
ClarkFable t1_j37yxla wrote
Very interesting article. Part of me wonders how much Cambridge is an outlier in our housing success (relatively speaking of course) because it has an insane tax base relative to population size.