DYSPEPSIA GENERATION

We have seen the future, and it sucks.

Expensive Urban Real Estate Is a Consumption Choice

12th November 2011

Read it.

You hear this argument all the time from people in New York.  “Rich?  Hah!  We’ve got four people in 1600 square feet, and our school bills are going to put us into bankruptcy.”  Many New Yorkers believe that they should be given some sort of income tax abatement because of the expense of living there (with the lost revenue being made up from “really rich” people, natch).  Slightly less affluent New Yorkers frequently believe that landlords should be forced to offer them “reasonably sized” apartments at a modest fraction of their income, because after all, otherwise they couldn’t afford to live in New York.

There’s a sort of irritating supposition in all of this that living in New York (or San Francisco, or Boston) is something that just happens to you, like getting cholera.  And that therefore high incomes, expensive real estate, and so forth, somehow don’t count for the purposes of assessing how well off you are relative to the rest of society.  In fact, perhaps society should get busy making it up to you for all the hardships.

2 Responses to “Expensive Urban Real Estate Is a Consumption Choice”

  1. Dennis Nagle Says:

    Actually, I’ve always thought that living in New York was much like catching cholera…

  2. Cathy Sims Says:

    I really love the parallel between living in New York and catching cholera!