4 ms·

It's crazy how people forget supply and demand concepts the moment we start talking about housing. The argument that building housing is useless because it's o

It's crazy how people forget supply and demand concepts the moment we start talking about housing. The argument that building housing is useless because it's often more expensive housing, is absolutely bonkers. It increases supply, it is positive for everyone, even those that can't afford it and it liberates a space for them that would have been taken by that high income person.

function_seven 4y ago
Yup. If I talk about a compression algorithm and claim you can run it multiple times and always get a smaller file out the other end, I'll be instantly reminded of the Pigeon Hole Principle. But then we talk about houses and occupants, and apparently that goes out the window. It's maddening.
prottog 4y ago
People often make the mistake of focusing on the long tail of market failures with the intent of more government intervention to fix them, without thinking about the 98% of times that markets deliver additional wealth to everyone involved.
DangitBobby 4y ago
I wonder what the impact of investors with bottomless pockets for real-estate is on supply and demand?
- bombcar 4y ago
  If such investors exist wonderful. Keep building housing until the national debt is eliminated! In reality at some point those investors will stop buying, at the point the return begins to diminish.
  - DangitBobby 4y ago
    At what point? How does that eliminate the national debt? How do people get into houses?
    - bombcar 4y ago
      If there’s investors to buy houses forever just keep building them and selling them to them. The government can do it and the national debt will be gone! Obviously, this doesn’t work because the investors are limited and will stop buying if they can’t make money.
hex4def6 4y ago
Of course what you're saying is true. However, you're dealing with people that believe a market economy is fundamentally unethical. They believe that benefits such as housing should be assigned entirely according to the individual's need, not how much money they are willing or able to spend on it. And who better than them as the judge of neediness? So of course it makes sense that you have people protesting this development in the article, demanding that 100% of the units be "below market rate," despite the obvious economic unfeasibility of this. After all, profit taking or "rent seeking" is inherently unethical and exploitative. They may have prevented 75 units from getting built, but at least they stopped a developer exploiting people's need for housing for profit. And, as a bonus, they send a message to other developers that you defy them at your peril.
- worik 4y ago
  Market forces will not fix this. This requires planning, and markets do not make plans
  - MichaelCollins 4y ago
    I'm sure the Californian Politburo will sort out their planned economy woes soon.

function_seven 4y ago

Yup. If I talk about a compression algorithm and claim you can run it multiple times and always get a smaller file out the other end, I'll be instantly reminded of the Pigeon Hole Principle. But then we talk about houses and occupants, and apparently that goes out the window. It's maddening.

prottog 4y ago

People often make the mistake of focusing on the long tail of market failures with the intent of more government intervention to fix them, without thinking about the 98% of times that markets deliver additional wealth to everyone involved.

DangitBobby 4y ago

I wonder what the impact of investors with bottomless pockets for real-estate is on supply and demand?

bombcar 4y ago
If such investors exist wonderful. Keep building housing until the national debt is eliminated! In reality at some point those investors will stop buying, at the point the return begins to diminish.
- DangitBobby 4y ago
  At what point? How does that eliminate the national debt? How do people get into houses?
  - bombcar 4y ago
    If there’s investors to buy houses forever just keep building them and selling them to them. The government can do it and the national debt will be gone! Obviously, this doesn’t work because the investors are limited and will stop buying if they can’t make money.

hex4def6 4y ago

Of course what you're saying is true. However, you're dealing with people that believe a market economy is fundamentally unethical. They believe that benefits such as housing should be assigned entirely according to the individual's need, not how much money they are willing or able to spend on it. And who better than them as the judge of neediness? So of course it makes sense that you have people protesting this development in the article, demanding that 100% of the units be "below market rate," despite the obvious economic unfeasibility of this. After all, profit taking or "rent seeking" is inherently unethical and exploitative. They may have prevented 75 units from getting built, but at least they stopped a developer exploiting people's need for housing for profit. And, as a bonus, they send a message to other developers that you defy them at your peril.

worik 4y ago
Market forces will not fix this. This requires planning, and markets do not make plans
- MichaelCollins 4y ago
  I'm sure the Californian Politburo will sort out their planned economy woes soon.