@[email protected]M to Fuck [email protected]English • 1 year ago[meme] How would you rather see this land developed?lemmy.worldmessage-square790fedilinkarrow-up11.41Kcross-posted to: [email protected]
arrow-up11.2Kimage[meme] How would you rather see this land developed?lemmy.world@[email protected]M to Fuck [email protected]English • 1 year agomessage-square790fedilinkcross-posted to: [email protected]
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish14•edit-21 year agoThe issue here is, in my country at least, the people who could possibly afford to buy one aren’t wanting to live in an apartment and the people who live in apartments aren’t capable of buying one. It’s not impossible, but it’s also very unlikely
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish-1•1 year agoIt’s the only option though. Bulldozing nature to build more cheap low density housing is not a viable plan.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish4•1 year agoIf it were the only option, it would be happening more. Just because the other options are bad doesn’t mean very much. They’re still happening.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish-1•1 year agoIt’s literally banned in most of the US, that’s why it’s not happening more.
![[meme] How would you rather see this land developed?](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/f6ec67a5-2636-4875-8dd4-fa5241a3083c.jpeg){kind=link}
The issue here is, in my country at least, the people who could possibly afford to buy one aren’t wanting to live in an apartment and the people who live in apartments aren’t capable of buying one.
It’s not impossible, but it’s also very unlikely
It’s the only option though. Bulldozing nature to build more cheap low density housing is not a viable plan.
If it were the only option, it would be happening more.
Just because the other options are bad doesn’t mean very much. They’re still happening.
It’s literally banned in most of the US, that’s why it’s not happening more.