deregualting housing would allow big cheap concrete houses and low prices

would also have to clean out laws and unions

but no problem

all gov laws can be removed by next election

with big far apart cheap huge hosues

population grow happy and rich

house is piece of service quipment

not a store of value

think of asa flashlight not a stock

 

{scribbled}

 

Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm


Mexico?

 

projects.. they tried that already, hasnt worked out to well...

other than them being like Indian reservation for the modern police, easy round up, easy kills..

 

The POOR MUST FEED THE RICH cavier, after that they (poor) can eat the sweepings.
This is the finest hour of absolute CAPITALISM.

 

the way I understood the idea was NOT massive crowded housing like projects, but anyone should be allowed to creat their own prestressed concrete home. Very safe, energy effecient and cheap AND everyone could make their own homes apart from each other. Similar to making an earthship. Promoting independence.

and this is why they won't let the idea fly, how can they take everything we make if we can have our own places. They want serfs not citizens.

 

Yeah, I'm sure it has nothing to do with preventing morons from killing themselves.

 

Yes,and historically speaking,it will only last about an hour in cosmic terms,and then we're all fucked -including you,I hope.Or are you being cynical/sarcastic/ironic?

 

Having the property sounds like the hard part. Where would be be putting this sprawl?

 

plenty of space all over

"Map Reminder: There is plenty of space on earth for more people"

http://betweenshowers.com/map-reminder-there-is-plenty-of-space-on-earth-for-more-people/

 

The last thing we need is to clear space for more people.

 

We already have too much suburban sprawl in America ..it's a waste of land

 

Sub-prime mortgage lending and a completely unregulated mortgage-backed securities market worked out so awesome, lets have no regulation of anything! arty:

 

yes, lets just cram everyone on ONE towering city with zero privacy - who cares about the proven fact that the bigger the city and the more the crowding the higher the crime and problem rate

 

Urban sprawl is worse. You're hyperbole of one city aside (really now?)

It eats up prime agricultural land (because most cities started as a farmer's hub around the best land to grow upon). Then you have problems like transportation, if your poor people are really spread out in a sprawl, then how do you get them to thier jobs? Then there's power and waste costs that skyrocket. There's a reason that only the rich folk can afford to live outside the city, in this day and age.

Larger sprawl also has an impact on the environment, not just the displaced animals but because of the sprawl, A LOT more carbon emissions.

Now crime...crime is created by people and inflicted on people. Why should we sprawl out and kill the planet because we as a species do crappy things to each other. I don't deny that high urban concentration effects some people in a negative way, criminally, psychologically or what not. But the answer surely isn't a sprawl of property with concrete cubes on them.

Besides the problems listed would be the acquisition of that sprawl land. Why would somebody sell that land to put poor people on? And then the regulation side, I can't even begin.

I'm not trying to be a douche here but it's clear that you're idea is a cascade of failure tied up with good intentions. Not all ideas can be the big winner. Do keep thinking about the problem though. We must never stop trying to solve, even if one idea is bad. You may want to grab some sociology and urban planning books. There are quite a few people out there that are trying to solve the problems we have with the current high-density living.

If you're serious about this, I can point you to some authors and sites and such.
If it's about ego and your idea having to be the correct one, immune to criticism, then carry on.

 

New York is just about the biggest city with extremely high density, yet it's crime rates are very low.

 

My comment pertained to the fact that the world is already overpopulated by humans. We don't need any excuse to make more of us. I rather have larg, more contained cities than spoil the untainted areas of nature.

 

Trust me, there's plenty room on the planet for many more of us, but sprawl would not be sustainable