Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
A correction here. I underestimated the Swedish population in the 1960s, which was up to 8 million. With a contemporary US population of ~330 million, the equivalent today would be 40+ million units. Or, if comparing 1968 Sweden to 1968 USA (200 mil ppl), 25 million units.

EDIT: And for further context, the US housing stock today is ~140 million units according to the Fed. Proportionally, 1/4 of 140 million would be 35 million - compared to 40. The point is to emphasize the monumental nature of the Swedish program, and how replicating it in the US from Fairbanks, Alaska to Miami, Florida might as well count as a Wonder of the World, a boom of Chinese proportions. TBH we don't need to go that far with rampant construction, which of course is notorious for ecological and social externalities.
Jesus, with that sweeping analogy including Miami, Florida - did I somehow forget Puerto Rico existed? Where does a state program of social housing have more relevance in the Union? The bias is real.

And just for even more context on what a build of 40 million units would mean - China's housing stock is currently 'only' (not more than) 250 million units - against US 140 million. And think of how much Chinese stock is outright geographically mal-apportioned from the outset.

5-10 million would be an appropriate level over 10 years for actual policy IMO. Local implementation with federal funding and vigilant oversight. Hopefully also drives down market incentives to disproportionately invest in luxury/high-end development.

40 million. That's Вставай страна огромная-tier. If Sweden can into houses, don't let no mutha tell you America can't.

What if we all - chipped in? Collaborative letters are probably a real thing.
I'm serious, btw.