Funny you should say that considering NAFTA and other FTAs have all been horrible for the environment. They give corporations an escape hatch for environmental regulations and fairly shortsighted processes for striking down environmentally-minded rules and regs, sinking us all to the lowest common denominator with little ability to raise and enforce them again.

They should also have a bill similar to NY where 3% growth in units over 3 years or builders remedy.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/12/business/economy/rent-control-explained.html

Thank God for capitalism <3

You made the "factual declaration" - how about some evidence?

Seriously - the MBTA Communities Act is a start, but it's still ultimately up to individual towns, which is not exactly confidence-inspiring

Well, deregulate in some instances. I don't want landlords to have the ability to force tenants out just to hike rent 30% for the next person

Can we loosen restrictions and the timelines for approvals on new construction instead?

The state needs to take zoning authority away from local municipalities.

Each individual town has zero incentive to allow more housing when they can just say “no, not here. Need to preserve our neighborhood character! Build somewhere else.”

Basically “I got mine, so fuck everybody else, not my problem.”

[deleted]

My issue is what’s considered historical.

A building isn’t “historical” and worthy of presets to on simply because it’s old.

But yes, universities need to stop buying land, and there needs to be more pressure for them to build more housing to house their students.

When I was in my 20s and living in Allston, it’s frustrating that I’m having to compete with so many BU students with rich parents, which ultimately drives up prices.

So do scientists but you won't find one who believes global warming isn't real, because there simply isn't evidence that supports that conclusion.

So apparently this is an unpopular opinion, but here it goes: We need some form of rent control, but by itself rent control will not do anything to help the housing crisis. Rent control makes sure that people don't get evicted from their homes just because a landlord decides they want to charge way more. It gives stability to people who rent, something which I don't think you can undersell.

Having said that, it's a bandaid. It addresses a symptom of the problem. It does absolutely nothing to address the main cause of the housing crisis, basic supply and demand. We need more housing, and while I think the best route is public mixed-income developments, at this point literally anything is better than the status quo. Rich NIMBYs are the real problem, don't lose sight of that.

Dalton

To add on to that, in many places the historical buildings have got to go. Especially in the Boston metro.

Also, we need to stop large universities like Harvard, MIT, Northeastern, and Boston University (my alma mater) from buying any more land. They're like tumors.

Terrible news, people voted to remove it for a reason.

“all economists believe free trade is good” is so ridiculous on its face, I figured you must have mistyped. you know that economists exist across an entire spectrum of opinions on this right?

What a well-thought out, eloquent, stinging rebuke.

Read a book

Make a blanket declaratory statement without backing it up? Pop off, king.

No, all economists don’t agree on those things.

Not that I’m arguing for or against rent control, but this is already happening without it

Doing everything except allowing significant new housing to be built.

As a resident of neighboring NIMBY Rhode Island, I feel your pain. Our local governments seem determined to send as many young and middle income people as possible out of state to places like Georgia and North Carolina.

Will not ever pass the State House

Would not be signed by Maura Healey

The bill's sponsors just want political points for being progressive

Empirical evidence disagrees but pop off king.