5 ms·

That (first) either assumes demand remains constant, or requires measuring actual cost vs theoretical cost instead of simply actual; and second, assumes that th

That (first) either assumes demand remains constant, or requires measuring actual cost vs theoretical cost instead of simply actual; and second, assumes that there aren't complex interdependencies - ie, more luxury housing can make an area more desirable and increase demand more than it increases supply - arguably that's the goal, since otherwise you're literally building places people want to live in less than what's already available.

xapata 4y ago
> more luxury housing can make an area more desirable Depends how big the "area" is that you're thinking about. The effect of increasing housing supply is well-studied. Demand can only grow as fast as the population does. If one area experiences increasing demand, then another area will have decreasing demand, comparatively.
- nradov 4y ago
  That relationship doesn't hold in ski resort areas. Wealthy people have increasingly bought up vacation homes even as the population remains flat. Those vacation homes are vacant much of the year. There are usually geographic and infrastructure constraints which make it impossible to build significant amounts of new housing within practical commuting distance. So long time local residents are effectively being forced out.
  - xapata 4y ago
    I have little sympathy for people that are "forced" to sell their homes for a large capital gain. They can move to where it's cheap and live large. Maybe my perspective as an immigrant is unusual, but I'm a big fan of the freedom to migrate. That includes the freedom to buy housing at market price.
    - nradov 4y ago
      Most of the people being forced out are renters.
      - xapata 4y ago
        Then it's even easier to move. If the polity doesn't want to zone for more housing, they've chosen to expel people who can't pay more than $X for rent. They'll feel the pain when there's no one around to make their coffee anymore. There's no such thing as unlimited demand for luxury housing. Build enough and the rent will fall for the existing housing stock.
        bombcar 4y ago
        I’m starting to feel we may be nearing a local maximum on housing, as more and more arguments seem to take for granted that it can never go down …
        seoaeu 4y ago
        > Then it's even easier to move. Moving requires finding a home somewhere that they can afford. The fact that they’ve been subjected to rising rents rather than a financial windfall like nearby homeowners… makes that far more difficult for them
        upvotepartytime 4y ago
        They could have bought. Instead they took advantage of the optionality afforded to a renter that can up stakes and move at will, without being tied to a mortgage. If they couldn’t afford to buy then they got to take advantage of a locale they desired at a lower price, another benefit of renting. (While it would be nice if anyone could live — and own — anywhere they like without worrying about price or competing demand from the billions of other humans around, that’s so far away from reality it’s not worth discussing.)
- RangerScience 4y ago
  Hmm. I guess that makes sense if you're looking comparatively within an area. I'm talking about an area as a whole; in particularly, I'm thinking of Venice CA and the DTLA arts district, as two distinct areas. (AFAIK) Venice is pretty much entirely shit house -> excellent house development, with some multi-unit (townhouses). DTLA is shit building -> modern condos / luxury apts. AFAIK in both places a secondary effect of all development is that each area becomes more desirable. I guess, sure, if one stopped becoming more desirable the pull from the other would change demand between the two, but, a) they're not, they're both developing, b) (anecdotally) that's a drop in the bucket compared to the overall demand, and c) they have sufficiently different appeals that the demand isn't coming from the same people.
  - xapata 4y ago
    What's causing the increased demand: births, immigration, or increased wealth? The pair of Venice and Downtown LA are not closed system. If people are immigrating to those places, then they've left somewhere else, which experiences a declining demand for housing.

xapata 4y ago

> more luxury housing can make an area more desirable Depends how big the "area" is that you're thinking about. The effect of increasing housing supply is well-studied. Demand can only grow as fast as the population does. If one area experiences increasing demand, then another area will have decreasing demand, comparatively.

nradov 4y ago
That relationship doesn't hold in ski resort areas. Wealthy people have increasingly bought up vacation homes even as the population remains flat. Those vacation homes are vacant much of the year. There are usually geographic and infrastructure constraints which make it impossible to build significant amounts of new housing within practical commuting distance. So long time local residents are effectively being forced out.
- xapata 4y ago
  I have little sympathy for people that are "forced" to sell their homes for a large capital gain. They can move to where it's cheap and live large. Maybe my perspective as an immigrant is unusual, but I'm a big fan of the freedom to migrate. That includes the freedom to buy housing at market price.
  - nradov 4y ago
    Most of the people being forced out are renters.
    - xapata 4y ago
      Then it's even easier to move. If the polity doesn't want to zone for more housing, they've chosen to expel people who can't pay more than $X for rent. They'll feel the pain when there's no one around to make their coffee anymore. There's no such thing as unlimited demand for luxury housing. Build enough and the rent will fall for the existing housing stock.
      - bombcar 4y ago
        I’m starting to feel we may be nearing a local maximum on housing, as more and more arguments seem to take for granted that it can never go down …
      - seoaeu 4y ago
        > Then it's even easier to move. Moving requires finding a home somewhere that they can afford. The fact that they’ve been subjected to rising rents rather than a financial windfall like nearby homeowners… makes that far more difficult for them
        upvotepartytime 4y ago
        They could have bought. Instead they took advantage of the optionality afforded to a renter that can up stakes and move at will, without being tied to a mortgage. If they couldn’t afford to buy then they got to take advantage of a locale they desired at a lower price, another benefit of renting. (While it would be nice if anyone could live — and own — anywhere they like without worrying about price or competing demand from the billions of other humans around, that’s so far away from reality it’s not worth discussing.)
RangerScience 4y ago
Hmm. I guess that makes sense if you're looking comparatively within an area. I'm talking about an area as a whole; in particularly, I'm thinking of Venice CA and the DTLA arts district, as two distinct areas. (AFAIK) Venice is pretty much entirely shit house -> excellent house development, with some multi-unit (townhouses). DTLA is shit building -> modern condos / luxury apts. AFAIK in both places a secondary effect of all development is that each area becomes more desirable. I guess, sure, if one stopped becoming more desirable the pull from the other would change demand between the two, but, a) they're not, they're both developing, b) (anecdotally) that's a drop in the bucket compared to the overall demand, and c) they have sufficiently different appeals that the demand isn't coming from the same people.
- xapata 4y ago
  What's causing the increased demand: births, immigration, or increased wealth? The pair of Venice and Downtown LA are not closed system. If people are immigrating to those places, then they've left somewhere else, which experiences a declining demand for housing.