3 ms·

Existing housing already has people living in it. Prices are so high because demand is high and supply is low; if your model for creating new affordable housing

Existing housing already has people living in it. Prices are so high because demand is high and supply is low; if your model for creating new affordable housing involves incentivizing for-profit developers to buy existing supply in this kind of market and sell or rent units to people who could not afford to do so themselves without the middleman, who is presumably being propped up by public money incentives, why even have the middleman? You could just hand out rent vouchers (or whatever) and achieve the same result for less. New high-density construction on lots that were previously low-density is better all around: It's more likely to be profitable for the developer, and it increases supply in a market that sorely needs it.

JaceLightning 5y ago
Handing out vouchers will increase the demand causing prices to rise. If you give people $10,000 to buy a house, congrats! You just made houses $10,000 more expensive. Do you live in a skyscraper? Does anyone want to live in a skyscraper? I don't.
- caconym_ 5y ago
  > Handing out vouchers will increase the demand causing prices to rise. If you give people $10,000 to buy a house, congrats! You just made houses $10,000 more expensive. To be fair, I think you are glossing over the fact that only handing out said vouchers to lower-income people will cause their buying power in the market to proportionally increase relative to wealthier buyers. However, you are absolutely right that this strategy will increase demand without increasing supply, and overall drive prices higher. I should clarify that I don't think it's a good idea; in fact, I think it's an absolutely absurd idea for precisely this reason. How anyone can suggest making housing more affordable by taking actions that will obviously make it more expensive is beyond me. This sort of thing probably only makes sense in the eyes of wealthy urban "liberals" who want to appear virtuous while maintaining their property values, and from far-left perspectives with no qualms about making life worse for the middle class to achieve their social justice-oriented goals for a relatively small fraction of the population. > Do you live in a skyscraper? Does anyone want to live in a skyscraper? I don't. I'm not sure of the relevance here.
- seanmcdirmid 5y ago
  I’d love to live in a skyscraper (99th floor?) but those are pretty expensive. 30 stories is about the limit for economical concrete construction, and those are hardly considered skyscrapers.
- projektfu 5y ago
  There is a wide spectrum in density between single family detached houses and skyscrapers. I used to live in an 18-story 20s-era building and loved it. I can't remember if it had 2 or 4 units per floor. The ranch house with the two big yards and no commercial center within a mile was probably the worst place I lived.
- pertymcpert 5y ago
  > Does anyone want to live in a skyscraper? This tells me you haven’t been to China.
  - Schiendelman 5y ago
    Or Seattle, for that matter. A huge proportion of our new housing is 40 stories and full.

JaceLightning 5y ago

Handing out vouchers will increase the demand causing prices to rise. If you give people $10,000 to buy a house, congrats! You just made houses $10,000 more expensive. Do you live in a skyscraper? Does anyone want to live in a skyscraper? I don't.

caconym_ 5y ago
> Handing out vouchers will increase the demand causing prices to rise. If you give people $10,000 to buy a house, congrats! You just made houses $10,000 more expensive. To be fair, I think you are glossing over the fact that only handing out said vouchers to lower-income people will cause their buying power in the market to proportionally increase relative to wealthier buyers. However, you are absolutely right that this strategy will increase demand without increasing supply, and overall drive prices higher. I should clarify that I don't think it's a good idea; in fact, I think it's an absolutely absurd idea for precisely this reason. How anyone can suggest making housing more affordable by taking actions that will obviously make it more expensive is beyond me. This sort of thing probably only makes sense in the eyes of wealthy urban "liberals" who want to appear virtuous while maintaining their property values, and from far-left perspectives with no qualms about making life worse for the middle class to achieve their social justice-oriented goals for a relatively small fraction of the population. > Do you live in a skyscraper? Does anyone want to live in a skyscraper? I don't. I'm not sure of the relevance here.
seanmcdirmid 5y ago
I’d love to live in a skyscraper (99th floor?) but those are pretty expensive. 30 stories is about the limit for economical concrete construction, and those are hardly considered skyscrapers.
projektfu 5y ago
There is a wide spectrum in density between single family detached houses and skyscrapers. I used to live in an 18-story 20s-era building and loved it. I can't remember if it had 2 or 4 units per floor. The ranch house with the two big yards and no commercial center within a mile was probably the worst place I lived.
pertymcpert 5y ago
> Does anyone want to live in a skyscraper? This tells me you haven’t been to China.
- Schiendelman 5y ago
  Or Seattle, for that matter. A huge proportion of our new housing is 40 stories and full.