>he doesn't like cars
Please ban commieblocks
Adam Butler
Nicholas Moore
Then don't make them
Nathaniel Howard
It's profitable in isolation. If you build a large complex (a "commieblock") and rent them out, you more than earn back your investment over time. The problem is that housing is scarce and if others are willing to pay rent, you'd have to be stupid to not offer your residence to the highest bidder. The solution is to simply build more houses (which the free market will always encourage as long as there's profit to be made), but various government regulations (I'm willing to bet my ass they're only in place because an elite of housing barons "sponsors" these regulations) makes it needlessly difficult to build more houses.
Making a select group of houses arbitrarily cheaper does not change the fact that there's a shortage. Letting contractors and housing corporations build more freely and pocket more of their profits does.
Owen Nguyen
A commyblock takes money to build and people that actually have a proper amount of money will not want to live in one. It also has maintenance cost etc.
In general you earn way less on a commy block then you earn on making housing for well off people. It's even more profitable to risk your house being unbought as long as other good housing is bought then you earn on poor people housing.
Muh regulations is nonsense. The ever declining wages here make it impossible to adjust commyblock rents to inflation.
You just can't make money of poor people housing in a declining economy that we are. Maybe that's better in the Netherlands but it surely isn't here. Not even in the best parts here (Bavaria, Baden-Würtemberg that are both significantly richer than the Netherlands).
Muh regulations, it's the state fault. REEEEEE capitalism works.
It does work as long as you can gas worthless people insteed of being kinda into humanist values trying to give them rights and see them as being worth something ust because they are human what causes social housing.
Jason Foster
>A commyblock takes money to build
That is correct. Everything does.
>and people that actually have a proper amount of money will not want to live in one
If they have better alternatives available they won't. If they don't... there's a reason why even a shitty one bedroom apartment in Amsterdam costs you an arm and a leg. That's because even people who would be able to afford a much larger house (in the countryside) are willing to settle for something smaller if it's in Amsterdam.
>It also has maintenance cost etc.
No shit.
>In general you earn way less on a commy block then you earn on making housing for well off people
Obviously, per capita you earn a lot less. But if we look at scale, there's more than enough money to be made from the lower and middle classes. Look at automobiles for example: the brands that generate the most revenue are ordinary city cars like Volkswagen, Toyota and Peugeot. Not luxury brands. Because there aren't a lot of people who can afford these luxury brands, even if they turn over insane profits per unit.
>Muh regulations is nonsense
Yes, because dead weight cost is fiction. Of course, we all know that city planning does not limit how many buildings can be built, where they can be built or how high they can be built at all. Right? All nonsense.
>The ever declining wages here make it impossible to adjust commyblock rents to inflation.
Of course that's also a problem, but increasing wages alone won't solve the problem. All that changes is that you now have the same number of people with more money competing for the same (too low) number of houses (in big cities).
>Muh regulations, it's the state fault. REEEEEE capitalism works.
It does though. Adding in a REEEE doesn't change that.
>It does work as long as you can gas worthless people
This is Jow Forums so I'm not even sure if you're being satirical or not.
Wyatt Cook
I really like my commieblock though.
Adrian Ross
Looks nice actually.
Charles White
>the brands that generate the most revenue are ordinary city cars like Volkswagen, Toyota and Peugeot. Not luxury brands. Because there aren't a lot of people who can afford these luxury brands, even if they turn over insane profits per unit.
No. There is a reason why Porsche owns VW and not vice versa.
The cheap people cars are not even VW but rather Dacia, Skoda or Seat.
It's not regulations. Has nothing to do with regulations. Cheap living space is even subsidized here yet still nobody but charity institusions (like churches) want to build those.
It doesn't work. They ust earn more on people with cash. On Investment in stocks on whatever. Housing for poor people was and is a thing of philantropy.
James Lee
For a commieblock it sure is.
Here's a better quality image.
Lived here for 6 years and I really like it.
Jeremiah Collins
What was the size of apartments? I know you have really small ones in such blocks.