3 ms·

The problem is, both person A and Person B have more money than the original $15-$20/h wage earner I spoke of in my original post. The amount of money you are

The problem is, both person A and Person B have more money than the original $15-$20/h wage earner I spoke of in my original post. The amount of money you are describing >Person A rents at $1800/mo and is able to save $1000/mo Is unimaginable for someone making $15-$20/h. Sometimes the people on HN really don't seem to grasp the reality of being an average working person. Everything you said in your post is nonsense that means nothing to a person literally living pay cheque to pay cheque with unchangeable expenses greater than income.

nly 5y ago
No, it's not nonsense. The person earning $15-20/h is 100% affected by this, since it leads to even greater inequality. These people you describe are renting and landlords want a certain yield on their properties. Higher demand for houses (or reduced supply) push prices up, which in turn push up rents.
- runarberg 5y ago
  I really don’t understand what people mean when they talk about the law of supply and demand with housing. What exactly does it mean for a demand of housing to go up? Population growth? Immigration? Or is it speculative buying and landlording? What about supply of housing? Does public housing mean increased supply? More shelters? What about squats? Or are just talking about municipal zoning? How does the economic law of supply and demand apply here? Everybody needs a house, lest they get homeless. By applying the law of supply and demand to housing you will inevitably get speculators and landlords—that is unless you regulate the market heavily—and with that you get stakeholders to the market and lobbying to policy makers. Then there is a serious power dynamics in favor landlords. So regulations are most likely not gonna favor tenants, who risk becoming homeless. Or does demand here refer to favorable neighborhoods (as OP hints at). So a new light rail station connecting to work sites increase demands for housing in that particular neighborhood at the cost of other neighborhoods who will now see reduced housing prices and increased vacancy? How is that good either? This seems like you (and OP) are willing throw some neighborhoods under the bus to gentrify some neighborhoods while impoverishing others. If not then what kind of demand are you talking about? No. What I want is for the market to stay away from housing... Or at the very least give me the option of public housing so that I personally have the choice of opting out of this silly game. Housing is far to important to my well being for the rich folks to play their silly games over.

nly 5y ago

No, it's not nonsense. The person earning $15-20/h is 100% affected by this, since it leads to even greater inequality. These people you describe are renting and landlords want a certain yield on their properties. Higher demand for houses (or reduced supply) push prices up, which in turn push up rents.

runarberg 5y ago
I really don’t understand what people mean when they talk about the law of supply and demand with housing. What exactly does it mean for a demand of housing to go up? Population growth? Immigration? Or is it speculative buying and landlording? What about supply of housing? Does public housing mean increased supply? More shelters? What about squats? Or are just talking about municipal zoning? How does the economic law of supply and demand apply here? Everybody needs a house, lest they get homeless. By applying the law of supply and demand to housing you will inevitably get speculators and landlords—that is unless you regulate the market heavily—and with that you get stakeholders to the market and lobbying to policy makers. Then there is a serious power dynamics in favor landlords. So regulations are most likely not gonna favor tenants, who risk becoming homeless. Or does demand here refer to favorable neighborhoods (as OP hints at). So a new light rail station connecting to work sites increase demands for housing in that particular neighborhood at the cost of other neighborhoods who will now see reduced housing prices and increased vacancy? How is that good either? This seems like you (and OP) are willing throw some neighborhoods under the bus to gentrify some neighborhoods while impoverishing others. If not then what kind of demand are you talking about? No. What I want is for the market to stay away from housing... Or at the very least give me the option of public housing so that I personally have the choice of opting out of this silly game. Housing is far to important to my well being for the rich folks to play their silly games over.