Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> I have to wonder to what extent that's actually true.

It’s fairly easy to do the exercise in many real estate markets. For example, look at recent sales on your favorite real estate platform and find neighborhoods with very different property sizes but otherwise similar features. An easy one is Atherton vs the areas of Menlo Park directly adjacent to it. Effectively identical commutes, literally the same schools, etc. Menlo Park is quite down-zoned by any reasonable standard, but Atherton is very down-zoned and has huge lots. The houses in Atherton look more expensive, but they’re actually dramatically less valuable per unit property size. If you owned property in Atherton and wanted to increase your property value, the best thing you could do is to magically teleport your property a single block away out of Atherton.



You’re picking literally the worst comparison. Atherton is almost impossible to compare to anything because houses like that are so insanely expensive to maintain and top end market size caps the value.

Literally you have no idea what you’re talking about. I mean it’s hard to imagine someone would have written this in good faith it’s so ridiculous.

This seems to be the conundrum in arguments like these — they baffle us because the comments are either quite obviously disingenuous or so radically stupid you lose hope in humanity.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: