We ought to be doing that with decent standard housing but if we have people who are absolutely on the streets in this case, I think it makes sense that tent cities are preferred to not having tent cities.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
If you think about making a city that is much more porous, many accessible spaces, that is a political position, because you don't fortify, you open it up so that many people can use it.
There are tremendous barriers to building housing. If we could break them down, the need for rent controls would go away.
This urbanization that's taking place around the world is very real. But if it's people that are seeking an urbanized environment out of desperation, that's not going to be helpful long term.
But instead of that stuff you get relationships with people and neighbors that you would never get in a city. People in small towns are a lot more open.
There's a major underlying idea as you grow up that you need to just save your money and get that affordable housing at the edge of town where you're away from the city where all the crime happens or whatever.
I want to buy up a gang of properties in my neighborhood and give people the chance to live in new buildings. We should make our areas nice.
Communities need to feel that they can accommodate people. Rather than feeling that it's not possible to integrate and that the stress and strain on housing and public services is too great.
I think that there will always be a need for Housing and Urban Development.
It's really kind of hard to be a suburb of nothing. If you don't have a downtown, you really don't have anything. It's hard to build a community around parking lots and subdivisions.
It would be great to take one city street and turn it into a pedestrian corridor and see what kind of effect it has on the businesses in that area - It's the future I think.