4 ms·

> The problem is the lack of housing supply. Get rid of the ridiculous regulations, allow more stock to be built, and revel in all the free foreign money that's

by kareemm 10y ago

> The problem is the lack of housing supply. Get rid of the ridiculous regulations, allow more stock to be built, and revel in all the free foreign money that's being showered on your city. I don't know how familiar you are with Vancouver, but housing starts in Vancouver are at a record high and supply has kept pace with population growth[1]. > But, no surprise, it's always easier to blame the foreigners than it is to risk your political capital. Demand is clearly overheated by foreign capital. To imply that blaming foreigners is a straw man is to misunderstand what's actually happening in Vancouver. 1 - http://business.financialpost.com/personal-finance/mortgages-real-estate/bank-of-canada-cant-do-anything-to-stop-the-housing-inferno-warns-bmo-economist http://business.financialpost.com/personal-finance/mortgages...

princeb 10y ago
i think this is the right idea increasing housing supply sounds like the best straightforward solution but the outcome you want to avoid is one where the government rapidly increases housing supply to match demand in order to keep apartment prices stable, but when the cycle reverses and all the foreign non-occupier owners pull out of the market the local occupier owners face a collapse in their home value. a lot of people feel that their apartment is the key to their wealth, so falling prices hurts (even though it also means they can move out into cheaper apartments because housing as a whole has fallen) and the government will want to avoid that scenario. this seems to be slightly different from the issue in SF where housing is driven by industry growth and poor public transport (reducing residents' mobility increases desirability of specific areas) in addition to foreign buyers. if one can easily separate non-occupier owners from local occupier owners and then apply a tax in order to discourage non-occupier ownership and that kind of behaviour (because it masks actual housing need which in turn makes urban planning difficult) then it will help a lot, i think. the other solution is to create zones that are available to foreign buyers, encourage high-value developments for tax revenue, and then make the balance of the housing stock restricted to owner occupiers - the new sale restrictions imposed on existing stock will reduce the price of existing housing stock but will buffet foreign money driven fluctuations on essential residential stock, but still provide a pressure release value for increasing foreign demand in the city.
thaumasiotes 10y ago
> I don't know how familiar you are with Vancouver, but housing starts in Vancouver are at a record high and supply has kept pace with population growth. So, supply has tracked population growth, demand has outstripped population growth, and that proves that increasing supply doesn't work?
- hx87 10y ago
  > supply has tracked population growth, demand has outstripped population growth That implies that demand is still outstripping supply, and thus "increasing supply doesn't work" isn't a good conclusion to draw from the data.
  - Tiktaalik 10y ago
    The takeaway is that the current levels of demand exceed the ability to provide supply. In this case a supply side only solution isn't able to solve the problem and policy to address the demand side is also required.

by kareemm 10y ago

princeb 10y ago

i think this is the right idea increasing housing supply sounds like the best straightforward solution but the outcome you want to avoid is one where the government rapidly increases housing supply to match demand in order to keep apartment prices stable, but when the cycle reverses and all the foreign non-occupier owners pull out of the market the local occupier owners face a collapse in their home value. a lot of people feel that their apartment is the key to their wealth, so falling prices hurts (even though it also means they can move out into cheaper apartments because housing as a whole has fallen) and the government will want to avoid that scenario. this seems to be slightly different from the issue in SF where housing is driven by industry growth and poor public transport (reducing residents' mobility increases desirability of specific areas) in addition to foreign buyers. if one can easily separate non-occupier owners from local occupier owners and then apply a tax in order to discourage non-occupier ownership and that kind of behaviour (because it masks actual housing need which in turn makes urban planning difficult) then it will help a lot, i think. the other solution is to create zones that are available to foreign buyers, encourage high-value developments for tax revenue, and then make the balance of the housing stock restricted to owner occupiers - the new sale restrictions imposed on existing stock will reduce the price of existing housing stock but will buffet foreign money driven fluctuations on essential residential stock, but still provide a pressure release value for increasing foreign demand in the city.

thaumasiotes 10y ago

> I don't know how familiar you are with Vancouver, but housing starts in Vancouver are at a record high and supply has kept pace with population growth. So, supply has tracked population growth, demand has outstripped population growth, and that proves that increasing supply doesn't work?

hx87 10y ago
> supply has tracked population growth, demand has outstripped population growth That implies that demand is still outstripping supply, and thus "increasing supply doesn't work" isn't a good conclusion to draw from the data.
- Tiktaalik 10y ago
  The takeaway is that the current levels of demand exceed the ability to provide supply. In this case a supply side only solution isn't able to solve the problem and policy to address the demand side is also required.