A short thread on how gov't action/regulations are good for society and the economy:
This great article by @jswatz & @cflav talks about how Virginia Beach is stopping some housing developments on land that is very likely to flood.
nytimes.com/2019/11/19/cli…
This great article by @jswatz & @cflav talks about how Virginia Beach is stopping some housing developments on land that is very likely to flood.
nytimes.com/2019/11/19/cli…
Developers want to build houses. Period. Once they build & sell the houses, they take their $$$ and walk away. If the houses later flood, developers don't bear the costs. Those costs are imposed on society.
So developers don't care at all if they build houses on land they KNOW will flood, as long as they can sell the houses before that happens.
There are a lot of terrible stories where developers did exactly this. For example, there's the subdivision that was built INSIDE the flood reservoirs outside Houston. Unsurprisingly, those houses flooded.
nytimes.com/interactive/20…
nytimes.com/interactive/20…
But, don't worry, the developer(s) got paid!
The solution is for gov'ts to prohibit construction on land they KNOW will flood. When that land does flood, it won't flood a neighborhood and society won't be on the hook for the costs. This generates huge benefits for society.
The solution is for gov'ts to prohibit construction on land they KNOW will flood. When that land does flood, it won't flood a neighborhood and society won't be on the hook for the costs. This generates huge benefits for society.
Developers hate this, of course, because they don't capture those benefits — they're distributed through society. So they complain about "overreaching" and "burdensome" regulation ... If you hear that, don't fall for it.
related thread:
related thread:
