3 ms·
> the free market has failed to provide housing to people Is it really a free market in places like the Bay Area where zoning is so restrictive and NIMBYs can
by klipt 5y ago
> the free market has failed to provide housing to people
Is it really a free market in places like the Bay Area where zoning is so restrictive and NIMBYs can show up to planning meetings to basically block any new construction?
It's been pointed out elsewhere in this thread that Japan also had a free market but less restrictive zoning and housing is much more affordable there.
The main argument for government efficiency would be if the government could override the NIMBYs more easily than private developers can.
- Apocryphon 5y agoEminent domain?
- PeterisP 5y agoReducing the ability of the neighborhood to prevent you from building housing on your property is probably the opposite of eminent domain; you could argue that enabling excessive NIMBY's is essentially eminent-domain-like taking of your property to do what the (local) government wants instead of what you want.
- erik_seaberg 5y agoWe don’t need to steal land. All it would take is legalizing enough construction.
- runarberg 5y agoidk about the housing market in Japan, but I was under the impression that housing prices in Tokyo were far from affordable. Also a quick glance at Wikipedia informs me the governments in Japan actually take a pretty active role in the housing market, including by providing public housing. Are you sure zoning is the only thing that sets apart the Bay Area from Japan?