Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

California

Auggie

(32,594 posts)

2. Luxury homes means higher property taxes. What city says no to that?

Reply to AllaN01Bear (Reply #1)

Fri Sep 24, 2021, 01:26 PM

Sep 2021

Inventory loss is also due to: second homes (including joint ownership LLCs like Pacaso.com), vacation rentals, and corporate retreats.

But let's not confuse NIMBYism with the importance of preserving and protecting open space, scenic vistas, biodiversity, watersheds, recreational areas, wildlife corridors, and ag lands.

Truth? Classic supply and demand. There are too many people in California. Public infrastructure—housing, transportation, water, utilities, education—can't keep up.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

3 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

How California plans to turn the screws on NIMBY cities. California is forcing cities to ... [View all] mahatmakanejeeves Sep 2021 OP

housing in ca is mostly over inflated . the developers and the building inspectors AllaN01Bear Sep 2021 #1

Luxury homes means higher property taxes. What city says no to that? Auggie Sep 2021 #2

+++ quaint Sep 2021 #3