Recent comments in /f/massachusetts

WinsingtonIII t1_j7pk1h4 wrote

> I thought those were all carved up for crappy apartments we can’t afford.

If you want housing prices to stop increasing, or even decline, you have to support building much more housing, and realistically that means building much more multi-family housing as that's the most efficient way to increase the number of housing units.

You can't complain about building the "wrong type of housing" and also complain about high housing costs at the same time. Especially if what you want is a single-family home, as SFHs are the least efficient way to build more housing to satisfy demand. It's fine to want a SFH, but if you want SFHs to not be really expensive, you need to be willing to support the building of much more housing, even if it's apartments.

4

bostonmacosx t1_j7pjm6u wrote

Just as food for thought.... we are not a state of population growth because of the price to live here....

New U.S. Census Bureau data released Thursday shows Massachusetts losing more than 7,700 residents from July 2021 to July 2022. That's nearly 14,000 people in the past two years. Massachusetts hit a new milestone of 7 million residents in 2020, only to see numbers decline since then.

3

bostonmacosx t1_j7pj90k wrote

New U.S. Census Bureau data released Thursday shows Massachusetts losing more than 7,700 residents from July 2021 to July 2022. That's nearly 14,000 people in the past two years. Massachusetts hit a new milestone of 7 million residents in 2020, only to see numbers decline since then.

3

Shnikes t1_j7pfed8 wrote

Banks do cash equivalent loans even when rates are higher? Also how often is this scenario happening? Because the new home they are buying for $800k was also likely $500k before the market took off. It’s unlikely they are getting a better house unless they are moving to a new city where the housing market didn’t take off.

2

his_dark_magician t1_j7pfdtw wrote

MA hasn’t build enough housing to keep up with increasing population and population density - it’s supply and demand. Across the Commonwealth, there seems to be an acknowledgment that there isn’t enough affordable housing, but many communities have barred themselves from becoming denser (which is also where more of the jobs are). People will always need a place to live, so demand has increased while supply has stagnated to the point of extinction for anyone who doesn’t own a house already.

Jean Jaques Rousseau said that whether one generation supplied the next generation with sufficient housing stock would be the project that made or broke future democracies. The Greatest Generation built and funded housing, schools and lots of other projects for babyboomers. Since reaching maturity, babyboomers have slashed tax revenues, ran up the deficit and mortgaged the biosphere several times over. I personally believe this was at least in part a response to the Civil Rights movement successfully forcing Americans to invest in infrastructure more equitably.

It doesn’t make sense and it’s why Massachusetts lost a seat in the House.

7

PakkyT t1_j7pf2db wrote

Your OJ example was the result of a civil case brought to court and a judgement (by an actual judge) rendered. This is not the same thing as having your property seized and then the government just deciding on their own to not return it even though you were not guilty (legally speaking) of any crime. As there was no civil case that allowed the seized assets to be kept by the government, they should be returned. If the government doesn't want to, then they need a court judgement stating they can keep it.

13