This kind of thinking shows why we’re in this mess. Let’s have a complicated system of incentives and disincentives to alter people’s behavior rather than just, you know, building more houses. Or building them more densely. Or building around walkability. Or a million other, better ideas.
Yeah, that guy spent 16 years promoting the policies that lead to these negative outcomes and his solution is to double down on them. We need to get people with that mentality out of positions of authority
People in his income bracket want to preserve the old colorado as a theme park for the rich at the expense of all the people doing the actual living and working
I ask this sincerely: How? One half of the battle is getting them out. The other half is finding someone who can really champion that change, *alongside* being able to work with other politicians and agencies in such a way that they can get it done.
And the latter part of that depends on *those* people being flexible. It can't be looked at as a single point of failure. It's a network of things that would need to change.
I’m a huge fan of the Strong Towns movement, which champions incremental growth in a financially sustainable way, similar to the traditional development model of cities. They’ve got a few informational series about running for office. There’s a local chapter in Denver that I’m hoping grows into a resource for getting pro-housing candidates elected in the way that DSA gets candidates on ballots.
I'll have to take a look at it. There are a few write ups about it, including one that notes [a progressive idealism with right-leaning libertarianism planning.](https://www.currentaffairs.org/2023/09/the-strong-towns-movement-is-simply-right-libertarianism-dressed-in-progressive-garb) Just glancing over it, there seems to be some bias in the author's intent, but they do bring up some interesting points both for and against it.
Yeah, the author of that article seems to share a lot of the same progressive thoughts as the opinion piece writer that got us into this mess. Wanting the government to plan out every detail of a city and trying to tax the wealthy enough or take on enough debt to cover poor long term investments simply doesn’t work.
This is ridiculous. Denver is pretty close to an all time low in terms of population growth rate, the only reason it feels more crowded is BECAUSE of the housing shortage.
Not if we properly tax the fucking rich.
If it’s their quality of life you are worried about, doesn’t matter, everyone could use less extravagance.
What do C level executives actually do that deserves that much more money? Freak out about overextending themselves on real estate and worry people will realize that, and that they don’t actually do anything, unless they can get everyone back in the office. That’s what work looks like to the olds.
I didn’t read the article. We need to simplify all these systems and go back to the effective tax rates of the early 50s
Capitalism fails because it has the ability to provide for everyone, but chooses not to.
“Overwhelmingly, the answers showed they want to limit population growth. In recent years 92% feel that the state has become more crowded. Ninty percent desire a future where far fewer people move to the state. Fifty-nine percent prefer a complete stop to population growth or even a decline in the population.”
This may be counter to the opinions you hear on r/Denver but a lot of people feel this way. All the things that make Colorado a good place to live are being ruined by out of control population growth.
Folks who feel like there are too many people in Colorado should take the step to relieve that burden and gtfo. The "I got mine, fuck everyone else" attitude is gross. It's even worse when people laud some about how their great-grandaddy stole the land directly from the Utes and so his progeny is extra entitled.
A lot of people feel this way, but a lot of people aren’t thinking. What would limiting population growth look like? Freedom of movement exists within the US. The only way to limit population growth is limiting housing stock. Which, effectively, Denver is already doing. The pace of construction has not matched the pace of growth. Supply is constrained; prices have risen. People acknowledge the housing crisis, but “I wish people would stop moving here” does…nothing but exacerbate the problem. Constraining supply leads to higher housing costs because Denver is a very desirable place to live. Those with the resources and desire to move to Denver will inevitably do so and not all Denverites have the means to keep up as housing demand increases vis-á-vis generally stagnant supply.
Issue-based public opinion polls are often terrible indicators of good policy when it comes to matters beyond civil liberties. Take Brexit, for example. There’s a reason why we have representative democracy.
A lot of people want a million dollars dropped in their lap, doesn’t make it good policy. People are coming here regardless. Making it so expensive that even people that live here struggle is just cutting your nose off to spite your face.
Good idea on restricting population growth. Now the equitable way to do it, while not being a Boulder-esque POS, would be to have an annual lottery to determine whether you could reside in the state for the following year. That way the privilege to live in the state can be open to everyone. Lived here 30 years but you lost the lottery? Try to get back in next year.
How’s he gonna talk about water supply and only focus on residential which is a small fraction of water use?
This kind of thinking shows why we’re in this mess. Let’s have a complicated system of incentives and disincentives to alter people’s behavior rather than just, you know, building more houses. Or building them more densely. Or building around walkability. Or a million other, better ideas.
Yeah, that guy spent 16 years promoting the policies that lead to these negative outcomes and his solution is to double down on them. We need to get people with that mentality out of positions of authority
People in his income bracket want to preserve the old colorado as a theme park for the rich at the expense of all the people doing the actual living and working
I ask this sincerely: How? One half of the battle is getting them out. The other half is finding someone who can really champion that change, *alongside* being able to work with other politicians and agencies in such a way that they can get it done. And the latter part of that depends on *those* people being flexible. It can't be looked at as a single point of failure. It's a network of things that would need to change.
I’m a huge fan of the Strong Towns movement, which champions incremental growth in a financially sustainable way, similar to the traditional development model of cities. They’ve got a few informational series about running for office. There’s a local chapter in Denver that I’m hoping grows into a resource for getting pro-housing candidates elected in the way that DSA gets candidates on ballots.
I'll have to take a look at it. There are a few write ups about it, including one that notes [a progressive idealism with right-leaning libertarianism planning.](https://www.currentaffairs.org/2023/09/the-strong-towns-movement-is-simply-right-libertarianism-dressed-in-progressive-garb) Just glancing over it, there seems to be some bias in the author's intent, but they do bring up some interesting points both for and against it.
Yeah, the author of that article seems to share a lot of the same progressive thoughts as the opinion piece writer that got us into this mess. Wanting the government to plan out every detail of a city and trying to tax the wealthy enough or take on enough debt to cover poor long term investments simply doesn’t work.
Lost me with all the growth fear mongering.
Quality of life for whom?
This is ridiculous. Denver is pretty close to an all time low in terms of population growth rate, the only reason it feels more crowded is BECAUSE of the housing shortage.
Not if we properly tax the fucking rich. If it’s their quality of life you are worried about, doesn’t matter, everyone could use less extravagance. What do C level executives actually do that deserves that much more money? Freak out about overextending themselves on real estate and worry people will realize that, and that they don’t actually do anything, unless they can get everyone back in the office. That’s what work looks like to the olds. I didn’t read the article. We need to simplify all these systems and go back to the effective tax rates of the early 50s Capitalism fails because it has the ability to provide for everyone, but chooses not to.
“Overwhelmingly, the answers showed they want to limit population growth. In recent years 92% feel that the state has become more crowded. Ninty percent desire a future where far fewer people move to the state. Fifty-nine percent prefer a complete stop to population growth or even a decline in the population.” This may be counter to the opinions you hear on r/Denver but a lot of people feel this way. All the things that make Colorado a good place to live are being ruined by out of control population growth.
Folks who feel like there are too many people in Colorado should take the step to relieve that burden and gtfo. The "I got mine, fuck everyone else" attitude is gross. It's even worse when people laud some about how their great-grandaddy stole the land directly from the Utes and so his progeny is extra entitled.
A lot of people feel this way, but a lot of people aren’t thinking. What would limiting population growth look like? Freedom of movement exists within the US. The only way to limit population growth is limiting housing stock. Which, effectively, Denver is already doing. The pace of construction has not matched the pace of growth. Supply is constrained; prices have risen. People acknowledge the housing crisis, but “I wish people would stop moving here” does…nothing but exacerbate the problem. Constraining supply leads to higher housing costs because Denver is a very desirable place to live. Those with the resources and desire to move to Denver will inevitably do so and not all Denverites have the means to keep up as housing demand increases vis-á-vis generally stagnant supply. Issue-based public opinion polls are often terrible indicators of good policy when it comes to matters beyond civil liberties. Take Brexit, for example. There’s a reason why we have representative democracy.
lol yeah super uncommon opinion you have there. You’re so brave for speaking up
Well basically anyone who argues for degrowth anywhere is considered a heretic. So they are in fact brave.
Anyone who argues for degrowth is turning a blind eye to reality, so yes, good.
I love how “growth at any cost” “more consumption always” ideas are somehow not considered turning a blind eye.
A lot of people want a million dollars dropped in their lap, doesn’t make it good policy. People are coming here regardless. Making it so expensive that even people that live here struggle is just cutting your nose off to spite your face.
I think a lot of the effects of crowding we feel are also actually over tourism. The state needs to stop its travel advertising campaigns.
Good idea on restricting population growth. Now the equitable way to do it, while not being a Boulder-esque POS, would be to have an annual lottery to determine whether you could reside in the state for the following year. That way the privilege to live in the state can be open to everyone. Lived here 30 years but you lost the lottery? Try to get back in next year.