Hacker News Reader

Why not? It increases supply

An RV is better than nothing but they are not built for continuous use. An RV that is being lived in full time will start falling apart in a few years.

RVs can be repaired or replaced. And if the alternative is expensive enough, it's financially worthwhile to do so.

It's just the least insane option in an insane world.

It increases the supply of blight, perhaps.

I mean would you rather have RVs or tents on sidewalks?

Many of those in lower quality housing have jobs. The service workers and whatnot in every community have to live somewhere.

Neither. Raise taxes and have the government build decent houses.

that has zero realistic chance of happening in the US. Even repealing the Faircloth amendment that limits public housing stock is not broadly popular.

And these days all housing providers, whether for-profit, non-profit, or public, are running into the same issues with zoning, financing, rising costs, etc.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com