America was great when Americans cared for each other and the New Deal, by Roosevelt and the Democrats, helped narrow the inequality between the rich and poor.
MAGAts don’t understand this.
America was great when Americans cared for each other and the New Deal, by Roosevelt and the Democrats, helped narrow the inequality between the rich and poor.
MAGAts don’t understand this.
Just because there are homes, doesn’t mean that the homes are in desirable locations.
1k empty homes in Iowa doesn’t do any good for someone in New York
Where do you think these tens of millions of vacant homes are? They are in every single city and suburb across the country. I’ll bet even Hawaii has homes sitting vacant. I know for a fact that there are almost 25,000 homes sitting vacant between downtown and the greater San Diego area, which happens to be 10,000 more than our entire county’s homeless population. The county of San Diego is larger than the smallest two or three states, BTW.
Ah yes, the Tankie-Nimby zombie myth that California already has enough homes if not for the evil capitalists hoarders at Blackrock. Note that 25,000 housing units is around 1% of the total housing supply in the SD metro area; i.e. about the number of empty homes we would expect just due to normal turnover and renovations.
Did you look at my link?
These numbers are not referring to temporarily vacant homes that are in between buyers, but longer term vacancies, often held by investment firms. From the article:
These homes can sit abandoned for years, causing neighbourhood blight and increased crime, in addition to removing opportunities from people who need housing.
Yes, it’s an uncaring capitalist thing, and no, it’s not a NIMBY thing – quite the opposite. The neighbourhoods with these homes would be far better off with residents than simply letting these homes rot .
Without even clicking I knew what the links would be, because they are the same ones that always get posted. And because this is a zombie myth, it doesn’t matter how many times they get debunked people still post them anyway. Your United Way “Study” is especially silly; for example it claims more than 25% of San Francisco housing units are vacant which is obviously not true.
Okay, how about actually presenting data to support your argument rather than just ‘nuh-uh’ and vague aspersions?
There are solutions, and most vacant houses are in major cities, which is also where many homeless people already are.
Detroit, for example, has large numbers of homeless people and also large numbers of these houses. Same with New York, large cities in California, etc.
There are ways to solve this, but there’s no way these large corporations will participate in a solution out of the goodness of their heart.
Right there must be a wealth transfer.
San francisco has around 50,000 vacant residencies and around 8,000 unhoused people. There is supply in these “desirable” locations, it’s just that under the logic of capitalism this supply isn’t made available to those who need it.
They’re desirable enough for large financial firms to hold as investment properties.