The effects of Seattle's residential real-estate boom may not be as clear cut as the loudest voices might have us believe. Please vote on your experience.
Every economic event creates winners and losers, and so it is with the Seattle real-estate boom. Set aside commercial, except to the extent that it displaces affordable apartments.
Some snapshots: The most appealing parts of Seattle and the Eastside have seen big price increases; we’re still cheaper than many technology centers, which makes us appealing to the techies … who bid up prices; in the city, activists see rising rents and loss of affordable buildings as a social justice issue and call for rent control or stabilization; yet the cycle has created plenty of winners, not only rich developers but average property owners who have been here for decades.
What has been your experience the past five years?
The poll has expired. Thank you for your submissions.
This Week’s Links:
- The tragedy of Ben Bernanke | Brad DeLong/Project Syndicate
- And now trucking is suddenly slowing down | Wolf Street
- Union power and inequality | Economist’s View
- World’s tallest timber tower to be built in British Columbia | TreeHugger
- Facebook workers forced to ditch iPhones | Wired
- Is the billionaire-creating carried interest loophole an endangered species? | Naked Capitalism
Today’s Econ Haiku:
Where stocks defied history