4 ms·

finding: lack of affordable housing.

kelseyfrog 4y ago
Aren't markets doing exactly what they were designed to do? There's no rule of markets that says everyone ends up with a good. I'm not sure what the problem is here.
- turnsout 4y ago
  Ah, there it is, the worst take on hn today. Congrats!
  - kelseyfrog 4y ago
    I'd be happy to be proven wrong by someone who can demonstrate that a maket can guarantee everyone a place to live, but so far the current state of affairs seems to be evidence of the contrary. It looks exactly like a market failure of a good with inelastic demand, but no one wants to come out and say that.
    - fallingfrog 4y ago
      If markets by themselves can’t supply everyone with a place to live- something which every human needs- then perhaps we should try a different approach. There are plenty of ways to solve this problem.
    - Schroedingersat 4y ago
      Wow, market realism much? You don't even seem to realise that's not the point that was being critiqued. Also housing is not a free market in the slightest. It's heavily subsidized for the benefit of 'investors' in the form of unpaid for infrastructure and being far less taxed than labour among other things, and extremely distorted by euclidean zoning and nimbyism.
    - comfypotato 4y ago
      Finland is an extreme example of a housing market that provides a place for everyone to live. Obviously it's not a free market, but does it not prove you wrong?
      - kelseyfrog 4y ago
        Right, and a market didn't accomplish that. This did > Julkisen vallan tehtävänä on edistää jokaisen oikeutta asuntoon ja tukea asumisen omatoimista järjestämistä.
        comfypotato 4y ago
        Powers outside of the academic oversimplification of supply and demand are at play in both markets, US and Finland. What is your logic that differentiates that which leaves people homeless in the US as "the market at work"?
        kelseyfrog 4y ago
        Basic economic definitions. The markets have no obligation to meet ineffective demand. In fact that's the real issue at stake. What does ineffective demand look like in housing markets: homelessness.
        comfypotato 4y ago
        Ineffective demand (in this case a sad thing) can be met, though [Finland], yet you say there is no problem. I’m upset by your callous remark.
        kelseyfrog 4y ago
        I see. I use being incorrect as a rhetorical device in order to be proven wrong so that we can have this conversation about how markets don't provide housing through ineffective demand. Saying something wrong on the internet is a good way to get people to make the arguments I want them to make.
- maxerickson 4y ago
  I mean, there are some regulations involved too. Housing developers usually aren't the problem.
- yellowapple 4y ago
  > I'm not sure what the problem is here. Aside from the obvious that a growing proportion of the population can't afford to not be homeless? It's almost as if treating land as property to be bought and sold in a market rather than a basic human right to which every human is equally entitled might be in and of itself a plague on society.
- nealabq 4y ago
  The simple model of the market -- that supply and demand will balance and establish a price -- is a first-order approximation. It's often very efficient. But externalities and market-failures are always lurking, and sometimes they're dominant, and they can mess up the balance even in the long term. In this case you might think that someone could buy some land+materials+labor in order to create-and-sell shelter. And that eventually the cost of shelter would be comparable to the cost of those inputs. And that works in a lot of places where housing is relatively affordable. But is that mechanism really setting the prices in San Francisco? And if not, what is causing the imbalance? How is the market being constrained and distorted? To whose benefit?

Aren't markets doing exactly what they were designed to do? There's no rule of markets that says everyone ends up with a good. I'm not sure what the problem is here.

turnsout 4y ago
Ah, there it is, the worst take on hn today. Congrats!
- kelseyfrog 4y ago
  I'd be happy to be proven wrong by someone who can demonstrate that a maket can guarantee everyone a place to live, but so far the current state of affairs seems to be evidence of the contrary. It looks exactly like a market failure of a good with inelastic demand, but no one wants to come out and say that.
  - fallingfrog 4y ago
    If markets by themselves can’t supply everyone with a place to live- something which every human needs- then perhaps we should try a different approach. There are plenty of ways to solve this problem.
  - Schroedingersat 4y ago
    Wow, market realism much? You don't even seem to realise that's not the point that was being critiqued. Also housing is not a free market in the slightest. It's heavily subsidized for the benefit of 'investors' in the form of unpaid for infrastructure and being far less taxed than labour among other things, and extremely distorted by euclidean zoning and nimbyism.
  - comfypotato 4y ago
    Finland is an extreme example of a housing market that provides a place for everyone to live. Obviously it's not a free market, but does it not prove you wrong?
    - kelseyfrog 4y ago
      Right, and a market didn't accomplish that. This did > Julkisen vallan tehtävänä on edistää jokaisen oikeutta asuntoon ja tukea asumisen omatoimista järjestämistä.
      - comfypotato 4y ago
        Powers outside of the academic oversimplification of supply and demand are at play in both markets, US and Finland. What is your logic that differentiates that which leaves people homeless in the US as "the market at work"?
        kelseyfrog 4y ago
        Basic economic definitions. The markets have no obligation to meet ineffective demand. In fact that's the real issue at stake. What does ineffective demand look like in housing markets: homelessness.
        comfypotato 4y ago
        Ineffective demand (in this case a sad thing) can be met, though [Finland], yet you say there is no problem. I’m upset by your callous remark.
        kelseyfrog 4y ago
        I see. I use being incorrect as a rhetorical device in order to be proven wrong so that we can have this conversation about how markets don't provide housing through ineffective demand. Saying something wrong on the internet is a good way to get people to make the arguments I want them to make.
maxerickson 4y ago
I mean, there are some regulations involved too. Housing developers usually aren't the problem.
yellowapple 4y ago
> I'm not sure what the problem is here. Aside from the obvious that a growing proportion of the population can't afford to not be homeless? It's almost as if treating land as property to be bought and sold in a market rather than a basic human right to which every human is equally entitled might be in and of itself a plague on society.
nealabq 4y ago
The simple model of the market -- that supply and demand will balance and establish a price -- is a first-order approximation. It's often very efficient. But externalities and market-failures are always lurking, and sometimes they're dominant, and they can mess up the balance even in the long term. In this case you might think that someone could buy some land+materials+labor in order to create-and-sell shelter. And that eventually the cost of shelter would be comparable to the cost of those inputs. And that works in a lot of places where housing is relatively affordable. But is that mechanism really setting the prices in San Francisco? And if not, what is causing the imbalance? How is the market being constrained and distorted? To whose benefit?