4 ms·

I have never heard this quote before, but I like it. It's a good point. So how about this to help lead the discussion. We, the HackerNews community, seem to hav

I have never heard this quote before, but I like it. It's a good point. So how about this to help lead the discussion. We, the HackerNews community, seem to have a general consensus that increasing supply is the best way to lower prices. Rather straight forward, really. But the reason why housing is currently limited is due to a conflict of interests; existing property owners want to stifle supply. And they have more political power than non-property owners in the state. So perhaps we can discuss ingenious policy ideas that would help feed their own self interests, but result in increased supply? The following article references how other countries were able to accomplish such a feat [How to turn NIMBYs into YIMBYs](https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2021/09/11/how-to-turn-nimbys-into-yimbys https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2021/09/11/h...)

greedo 5y ago
Is more housing really the answer? I keep thinking of induced demand increasing traffic on the roads, and I wonder whether California would just have more people consume the additional housing. Instead of increasing the supply, perhaps addressing the demand is the only way out.
- foofoo4u 5y ago
  > Is more housing really the answer? > Instead of increasing the supply, perhaps addressing the demand is the only way out. Prices are a reflection of supply and demand. There are only two ways to lower prices. Either increase supply or lower demand. One of them is a solvable issue, which is to increase supply. The other option, which is to lower demand, is either unrealistic or unfair. How, do you suppose, we lower demand? The only way you can lower demand is by getting people to change their mind. But how can you realistically expect people to change their mind? Everyone wants to move to L.A., the Bay Area, and other expensive cities because of the good jobs, universities, and career opportunities exist there. > I keep thinking of induced demand increasing traffic on the roads Induced demand is an interesting topic, but do not conflate it with the housing crisis. These are two fundamentally different economic situations. Induced demand is theoretically "induced" because the public good or service is free and utilizing the resource comes at no additional cost to the consumer. Homes on the other hand are not free. They come at a price. And therefore, there is nothing inducing its demand like you would theoretically see with widening a freeway.
- closeparen 5y ago
  Of course more people would consume the additional housing. Did you think the proponents planned for it to sit empty? There is some rank ordering for access to housing in desirable places. They take in N households. In a market economy, a small value of N shows up as a high price. Of course a lower price would correspond to a higher value of N. That's not some kind of counterintuitive cause and effect relationship, it's the same fact. The point is that more people get to satisfy their desires to live in cities. Living in a city stops being something reserved for the top N households.

greedo 5y ago

Is more housing really the answer? I keep thinking of induced demand increasing traffic on the roads, and I wonder whether California would just have more people consume the additional housing. Instead of increasing the supply, perhaps addressing the demand is the only way out.

foofoo4u 5y ago
> Is more housing really the answer? > Instead of increasing the supply, perhaps addressing the demand is the only way out. Prices are a reflection of supply and demand. There are only two ways to lower prices. Either increase supply or lower demand. One of them is a solvable issue, which is to increase supply. The other option, which is to lower demand, is either unrealistic or unfair. How, do you suppose, we lower demand? The only way you can lower demand is by getting people to change their mind. But how can you realistically expect people to change their mind? Everyone wants to move to L.A., the Bay Area, and other expensive cities because of the good jobs, universities, and career opportunities exist there. > I keep thinking of induced demand increasing traffic on the roads Induced demand is an interesting topic, but do not conflate it with the housing crisis. These are two fundamentally different economic situations. Induced demand is theoretically "induced" because the public good or service is free and utilizing the resource comes at no additional cost to the consumer. Homes on the other hand are not free. They come at a price. And therefore, there is nothing inducing its demand like you would theoretically see with widening a freeway.
closeparen 5y ago
Of course more people would consume the additional housing. Did you think the proponents planned for it to sit empty? There is some rank ordering for access to housing in desirable places. They take in N households. In a market economy, a small value of N shows up as a high price. Of course a lower price would correspond to a higher value of N. That's not some kind of counterintuitive cause and effect relationship, it's the same fact. The point is that more people get to satisfy their desires to live in cities. Living in a city stops being something reserved for the top N households.