3 ms·

"Zoning is regulation." > Business regulation. Are you really not aware that when people are mentioning Texas' easy regulation many times they are literally of

"Zoning is regulation." > Business regulation. Are you really not aware that when people are mentioning Texas' easy regulation many times they are literally often talking about zoning? > You seem to be misunderstanding me. It's not that it can't be done in the populated area, but that it's better done in areas not already in a precarious situation. No I completely understand you, and find the "too many dense already" line of logic ludicrous. Most of these American cities have zoned over 80% of their land at one story buildings only. American cities are already at the lowest density compared to European or other countries density. They can accommodate plenty of housing fine. > So we have circular logic here. If the labor is expensive, you aren't going to make it cheaper (at least short term) by building more houses because the labor cost to build those houses will still be high. No there is no circular logic here. As I already noted the larger burden of the cost of housing comes from zoning restricting the amount of buildable land. And yes you will need to build lots of housing -- thats what happens one restricts building housing for decades.

giantg2 5y ago
"Are you really not aware that when people are mentioning Texas' easy regulation many times they are literally often talking about zoning?" Source? The ones I have seen say "business-friendly regulations". They also mention companies moving their headquarters to the state, which means taking advantage of incorporating there, which extends to out of state worker, for which zoning does not apply. The cheaper housing is why many individuals are moving to TX. "They can accommodate plenty of housing fine." If the infrastructure is only set up for single family homes and the land is covered in them, then you would need massive infrastructure updates which the cities can't afford, and you would also have to demolish many existing homes to make room - what a waste. "No there is no circular logic here. As I already noted the larger burden of the cost of housing comes from zoning restricting the amount of buildable land." Do you have an economics background? Can you explain how the labor cost suddenly decreases as the demand for labor increase and their costs stay the same? "... and find the "too many dense already" line of logic ludicrous." My position is more nuanced than that. It seems you've already made up your mind and dont care to explore my position. Good luck.
- resonantjacket5 5y ago
  > Source? The ones I have seen say "business-friendly regulations". Zoning also is for businesses too. For example Elon's relatively fast approvals for their new factories > the infrastructure is only set up for single family homes and the land is covered in them, then you would need massive infrastructure updates which the cities can't afford Again another ludicrous claim. Seriously every country around the world can build this infrastructure for supporting beyond 1 story tall. America is not some special snowflake here. Yes it'll cost some money to upgrade it -- not it's not rocket science nor some giant cost. You're just working backwards justifying why American cities couldn't accommodate anything beyond 1 story tall then grabbing any reason to block it. > Do you have an economics background? Can you explain how the labor cost suddenly decreases as the demand for labor increase and their costs stay the same? I could ask the same to you do you have an economics background? But in any case yes I do. Regarding the labor cost, I was responding to why you think labor costs are a barrier to housing and while it's true, the root cause to solve it goes the other way around. Aka even if labor costs were flat it wouldn't solve the housing crisis. > My position is more nuanced than that. It seems you've already made up your mind and dont care to explore my position. Good luck. It can be as complicated as you want but as the end of the day if it's stemming from blocking housing it really isn't that special.

giantg2 5y ago

"Are you really not aware that when people are mentioning Texas' easy regulation many times they are literally often talking about zoning?" Source? The ones I have seen say "business-friendly regulations". They also mention companies moving their headquarters to the state, which means taking advantage of incorporating there, which extends to out of state worker, for which zoning does not apply. The cheaper housing is why many individuals are moving to TX. "They can accommodate plenty of housing fine." If the infrastructure is only set up for single family homes and the land is covered in them, then you would need massive infrastructure updates which the cities can't afford, and you would also have to demolish many existing homes to make room - what a waste. "No there is no circular logic here. As I already noted the larger burden of the cost of housing comes from zoning restricting the amount of buildable land." Do you have an economics background? Can you explain how the labor cost suddenly decreases as the demand for labor increase and their costs stay the same? "... and find the "too many dense already" line of logic ludicrous." My position is more nuanced than that. It seems you've already made up your mind and dont care to explore my position. Good luck.

resonantjacket5 5y ago
> Source? The ones I have seen say "business-friendly regulations". Zoning also is for businesses too. For example Elon's relatively fast approvals for their new factories > the infrastructure is only set up for single family homes and the land is covered in them, then you would need massive infrastructure updates which the cities can't afford Again another ludicrous claim. Seriously every country around the world can build this infrastructure for supporting beyond 1 story tall. America is not some special snowflake here. Yes it'll cost some money to upgrade it -- not it's not rocket science nor some giant cost. You're just working backwards justifying why American cities couldn't accommodate anything beyond 1 story tall then grabbing any reason to block it. > Do you have an economics background? Can you explain how the labor cost suddenly decreases as the demand for labor increase and their costs stay the same? I could ask the same to you do you have an economics background? But in any case yes I do. Regarding the labor cost, I was responding to why you think labor costs are a barrier to housing and while it's true, the root cause to solve it goes the other way around. Aka even if labor costs were flat it wouldn't solve the housing crisis. > My position is more nuanced than that. It seems you've already made up your mind and dont care to explore my position. Good luck. It can be as complicated as you want but as the end of the day if it's stemming from blocking housing it really isn't that special.