> Why is the American public and the politicians so clueless about (supply vs demand) We're not clueless, but supply and demand is mostly meaningless in housin

> Why is the American public and the politicians so clueless about (supply vs demand) We're not clueless, but supply and demand is mostly meaningless in housing in the US. (I get that much of Hacker News is San Francisco based, and the Bay Area is an outlier in that it has an actual shortage of units). But except for a few very-specific cities (like SF), in most US cities the price of housing has absolutely nothing to do with supply nor demand. US housing prices are set by federal monetary policy, used as investment vehicles for banking and private equity, with some money laundering and scams thrown in, to create good-looking artificial economic indicators. Most housing can not depreciate in the US. This is intentional, explicit, federal policy. (Guaranteed and backed up by the full faith of the federal government). Macro-level depreciation at the urban level simply isn't allowed for any reason. (Seriously, this is not an exaggeration. We poisioned an entire cities drinking water and despite demand being practically zero, that city still hasn't lost meaningful values on it's housing). You can't build faster than the feds can raise prices, and even if you could, most cities are not short on houses. (Half of the top 40 major US cities literally already have more empty/abandoned homes than they have homeless people) If we pulled all that political monetary policy out of housing, then sure, our housing could be based on actual supply and demand (Japan-style). But politically, that will never happen in the US. Most Americans can't articulate all of the above clearly. But any American that has ever bought a house knows damn well that the price they paid is entirely political and has no basis in reality, and most Americans know that the primary way housing prices go up is through new construction, so most Americans aren't going to be swayed by an argument to "just build even more" > Homes should be made for living. Not for investments or speculation. I agree, but generally speaking, America does not. All housing is investment here. Unless your wealthy enough to DIY it yourself, houses literally don't get built here unless it's a "profitable investment". (Banks often won't even finance things that lower average housing costs) This is also why YIMBYism doesnt work here. The problem is too much investment in housing already. But new construction is assessed high, and all housing everywhere is assessed based on the closest comparable, so it becomes an infinite feedback loop until the bubble pops. You can't solve that with even more investment, the investment is causing the prices to rise in the first place!