16 ms·

How Tokyo avoided the affordable housing crisis

39 points by Gatsky 4y ago

hunglee2 4y ago
nimbyism has become a structural issue since we allowed real estate to became an asset class rather than primarily a place to live. It's not just a case of rich people being d1cks - it is this too - but also because so many home owners now depend on house price inflation for future retirement. This was actually a central part of the 'American dream' and actively sold to the people as the way to get ahead.
- jmeister 4y ago
  "The fact that real estate in FL or TX has melted up over the past 2-3 years is not evidence of succeeding to build a better model than California, it's evidence that they are becoming like California." -- Peter Thiel at NatCon 2022
- kache_ 4y ago
  downstream effect of debasing currency
- anovikov 4y ago
  Question must be - why? Why owning stocks wasn't pushed nearly as intensely? It makes more benefit to the economy (to say the least). Is it just the Red Scare that motivated that course of action of the government?
  - mschuster91 4y ago
    > Why owning stocks wasn't pushed nearly as intensely? From an European POV, you Americans already push stocks and individual retirement savings like they are a golden calf with your 401k plans and the slaughter of actual pension systems. As for home ownership: it certainly is better in retirement if you own your paid-off home and only have to foot property tax, utilities and a savings fund for renovation out of your retirement accounts or pension payments.
    - mellavora 4y ago
      Assuming increases in property tax (to fund city/state pensions and needed renovations to infrastructure) don't force you out of your home.
    - anovikov 4y ago
      "actual" pension system is a lie, it's merely a Ponzi scheme. So Americans are doing that one right.
    - choko 4y ago
      There are pension systems in the USA dependening on industry. The issue is that the pension systems have to depend on an ever-increasing pool of contributors which is not sustainable long term.
      - anovikov 4y ago
        Exactly. They are a scam. Not more sustainable than Madoff scheme.
    - midoridensha 4y ago
      >the slaughter of actual pension systems. What are you talking about? Government-run pension systems, or company-run ones? The government-run one is called "Social Security" and it hasn't gone anywhere, and certainly hasn't been "slaughtered". It hasn't changed in ages really; the problem is there's fewer contributors and more recipients now due to population aging, so when the surplus runs out in 15 years, it'll be restricted to only incoming funds, so recipients will receive less. Company-run pensions are indeed dead in America, for good reason, being replaced by 401k plans. Why would you want your retirement security tied to your former employer? What happens when the company mismanages the pension, or the company fails? This has happened many times here, with older people losing everything except the social security which isn't that much. That's why they moved to the 401k system, so retirement funds are put into the hands of a better-regulated 3rd party financial firm to be invested in securities. I don't see the problem here. I have my issues with many things in America, but this is one thing they did right. It could be better: some 401k providers are much better than others, for instance (some have poor securities selections available, some have high fees, etc.), but overall it's much better than the old days of having a company pension.
  - implements 4y ago
    I’ve wondered that. If innovation has an optimal economically efficient rate then would businesses wasting inflated stock market capital chasing competitive advantage ‘before it’s time’ be a good thing? (Heretical thought) Perhaps when there’s too much money effectively forced into poor investment opportunities (stocks, housing, whatever) countries would be better off taxing and investing it in education, infrastructure, energy security, etc - things that help generate better and wider returns in the future?
    - anovikov 4y ago
      Education - i doubt it has much room for growth. It already reached a phase where people who are too dumb to get any kind of degree are chasing degrees that will bring them no benefit in life. If anything, there needs to be a crackdown on higher education to prevent too many people from wasting the most productive years of their lives for nothing, instead of yeah, spending them building infrastructure (roads, bridges, etc).
- mellavora 4y ago
  NIMBYism has been a structural issue since Hoover first signed zoning laws in 1924 while service as Secretary of Commerce. The default of those laws has been to deny permissions. Yes, zoning is local. But read the history to find out where it started and how it was decided that this was a local power. https://economics21.org/history-zoning-america-flexible-housing-approach https://economics21.org/history-zoning-america-flexible-hous... Also note that this government regulation hinders the power of the free market to meet the population's housing needs. Japan takes a different approach to zoning, thus allowing market forces to better serve the people.
jaclaz 4y ago
Hmmmm. IMHO a very peculiar take on the matter, it is the first time that I read that Tokyio has affordable housing (or maybe it has if compared to New York, or London, but these are - as I see it - outliers when it comes to prices). In any case attributing the difference entirely to the zoning laws seems to me baseless and definitely an oversimplification. Generally speaking zoning laws can make a substantial difference in house prices where they are simple AND there is land available, but where very little land is available?
- midoridensha 4y ago
  There's plenty of land in Tokyo, it's just all used for something, not sitting empty, which I would think is the case for any normal city. The zoning laws means that land can be reused, at any time, for housing if some company thinks it's more profitable to build a housing building there than a warehouse or a store. Restrictive zoning means only a portion of the land can be used for housing, and can never be turned into housing as land becomes more valuable. The amount of land is irrelevant. Go back and look at the article, in particular the picture of the NYC zoning map. Only certain portions of the total land is actually usable as housing. In Tokyo, this just isn't the case: almost all of it is. You can't tear down an old warehouse in NYC and build a condo tower there, at least not without a lot of political difficulty. In Tokyo, it's pretty trivial.
  - jaclaz 4y ago
    Look, "available land" means "land that is not used". It is clear that more flexible zoning laws allows for easier re-use, if there are abandoned old warehouses and other limitations (height of buildings) do not exist, then this may contribute to more availability and lower prices, but you need many, many converted old warehouses to make a dent in availability, and not necessarily large availability drives prices down. Differences in zoning laws have a relatively high impact in places where there is plenty of available, unused, land.
- hgfdhgdfhgf 4y ago
  Their argument is not baseless at all. Zoning laws ban the building of new homes in certain zones. Zones which do allow housing in America are height restricted and area restricted. Tokyo allows house building homes in every zone but two. This includes building homes on top of existing buildings where "very little land is available".
makach 4y ago
web archive; https://web.archive.org/web/20220919083040/https://www.konichivalue.com/p/contrarian-investing-how-tokyo-avoided https://web.archive.org/web/20220919083040/https://www.konic...
Markoff 4y ago
They don't, house prices in Tokyo are anything but affordable. "The price of new apartments in Tokyo toppled a 30-year-old record in 2021 as rising demand from dual-income households and increasing construction costs boosted the Japanese capital’s once-moribund housing market." https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-25/apartment-prices-in-tokyo-are-set-to-exceed-bubble-era-high https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-25/apartment... "Tokyo is one of the most expensive cities in the world, so there is no doubt that Tokyo house prices are also very costly." https://questionjapan.com/blog/location-guides/tokyo-house-prices/ https://questionjapan.com/blog/location-guides/tokyo-house-p...
- midoridensha 4y ago
  This is basically BS; housing in Tokyo is only expensive from an American point-of-view because Americans only look at $/square foot, and don't realize not everyone wants or needs a palatial home. 25m^2 apartments are very common in Tokyo and generally affordable by normal people, but such a compact place would probably be downright illegal in America because of housing codes. Try getting a nice, safe, comfortable, and modern apartment in NYC on USD$1000/month; I don't think it's possible. In Tokyo, it's common. Also, Tokyo being one of the most expensive cities to live in is a myth, so any source that makes that claim is, to me, immediately disqualified as having truthful information. Going out to eat here costs a fraction of what it does almost anywhere in the US.
  - NhanH 4y ago
    25m^2 is way way too small for a comfortable life though. For single, you want around 50-60 m2 and 80m2 for a family of 3.
    - innocenat 4y ago
      Strongly disagree as someone who live in 20m^2 for the past 5 years. Public space like parks and the walkability of the neighborhood are very important factor for comfortable living in small space. Both of which Japan do very well.
yellow_lead 4y ago
> Tokyo's population is growing faster than New York and London, but its housing prices are less than half. How? > The current metro area population of Tokyo in 2022 is 37,274,000, a 0.18% decline from 2021. [1] > The current metro area population of New York City in 2022 is 18,867,000, a 0.23% increase from 2021. [2] For the past 4 years this hasn't been true, year over year. [1] https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/21671/tokyo/population https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/21671/tokyo/population [2] https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/23083/new-york-city/population https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/23083/new-york-city/popul...
- trinovantes 4y ago
  The only way you can get 37 million people in Tokyo is if you account for the entire Tokyo prefecture (similar to state/province). The western parts are largely rural and accounts for most of the population decline. The actual urban area in the central wards are still growing. https://japanpropertycentral.com/2022/08/central-tokyos-population-continues-to-grow/ https://japanpropertycentral.com/2022/08/central-tokyos-popu...
  - marcinzm 4y ago
    I mean if you restrict things enough than any metric is possible. Looking at 500k people (your link) out of 37m (Tokyo Prefecture) or 9m (Tokyo 23 Wards) I feel isn't the best metric.
    - trinovantes 4y ago
      Probably best to just restrict both NYC/Tokyo to their urban areas and their respective housing costs which is what this blog post is originally about. Otherwise, you can just say there are "free" homes in "Tokyo" because there's a lot of abandoned homes in the rural parts that you can squat. For Tokyo, I think discussions about population change should be focused on the 23 central wards. Here's a more up-to-date source: https://www.toukei.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/jsuikei/js-index.htm https://www.toukei.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/jsuikei/js-index.htm (it seems to be 14mil today vs 9mil in 2016)
ekianjo 4y ago
Lol this has to be the worst headline ever. Tokyo is nowhere affordable unless you have a SV salary while living in Japan. Median Japanese salaries are not high and that is precisely why people commute from very far away to go to work in Tokyo.
- fomine3 4y ago
  Japanese are fine without SV salary because they don't want big house like SV
  - ekianjo 4y ago
    its not that they dont want, they were never given the choice. I can guarantee that very rich Japanese people enjoy big houses.
    - fomine3 4y ago
      It's true that people live smaller house than they want, but the size shouldn't be too big. Metropolis with great public transport or good city with big house and car, pick one. Riches can have big house and a car in the metropolis but it's impossible everyone to have. For who prefer big house, they can live in local cities if they can remote work
      - ekianjo 4y ago
        > For who prefer big house, they can live in local cities if they can remote work If you want to have a family you basically can't live in a small cramped apartment in the city. That's why families with kids move out and people commute like crazy.
- bamboozled 4y ago
  This comment is real and should not be down voted.
- innocenat 4y ago
  6m/year is more than median income but is nowhere near SV salary and I know tons of people living in central Tokyo on that salary.
hgfdhgdfhgf 4y ago
I'm not sure if the people here who say Tokyo is not affordable are reading the article. Tokyo is affordable compared to similar cities like NYC. Tokyo built 130,000 new homes vs NYC's 30,000 in 2020. Tokyo's average home price is $300,000 compared to NYC's at $778,000+.
- marcinzm 4y ago
  I just Googled those claims. Comparing the average house price of the Greater Tokyo Metropolitan Area (5200 mi^2) to NYC (472.43 mi^2) is really a biased comparison. I suspect the houses built metric is similarly taken out of context possibly due to houses being torn down (more common in Japan than the US) meaning there's isn't as much of a net new home build up.
  - anovikov 4y ago
    Maybe this is the whole point. Tokyo has public transport system that makes commute across such a vast area possible, and this is what explains property prices.
    - marcinzm 4y ago
      There is a whole NYC Metropolitan Area which spans 4669 mi^2.
      - hgfdhgdfhgf 4y ago
        What is the average home price in the "whole NYC Metropolitan Area"?
        marcinzm 4y ago
        You're free to do that research, I posted not to make any specific argument but simply to point out that making out of context claims isn't cool.
bamboozled 4y ago
Tokyo is affordable, if you make a lot of money. If you like to commute for 1.5-3 hours a day its affordable.
jansan 4y ago
Here is the historical data for Japan's residential poperty prices. Make sure to set the start date in the chart to 1980 (direct link with these parameters does not seem possible) to know how cazy it was in the late 80s/early 90s. https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/japan/real-residential-property-price-index https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/japan/real-residential...
jbay808 4y ago
Zoning, as the article mentions, is one important element. I think there are others. The excellent transit system, and cultural acceptance of small homes for example.
- sanxiyn 4y ago
  I think these articles should explain difference between Tokyo and Seoul. South Korea basically copied Japan's zoning system, it is inclusive, central, etc. and Seoul has excellent transit and Koreans are (although not to the extent of Japanese) fine with small homes and high density. Still Seoul is nearly 2x as expensive as Tokyo.
  - jbay808 4y ago
    Good points. I wonder to what extent the Japanese real estate bubble pop of 1992 played a role. Housing in Tokyo was sky-high in 1989, to be sure, despite their zoning rules being enacted in 1968.
endisneigh 4y ago
United states is already more affordable than most of the world if you use median income to dollars per sqft per month in rent. The whole Tokyo is so cheap meme really has to die. It’s just a bunch of rich foreigners enjoying purchasing power differences. Average Tokyo people on average Tokyo wages certainly do not think it is so cheap. Go watch Asian boss on YouTube.
- jbay808 4y ago
  > It’s just a bunch of rich foreigners enjoying purchasing power differences. Not all foreigners who consider the grass greener in Tokyo are American or have a purchasing power advantage. Some just come from an area where housing affordability makes Tokyo look good.
  - endisneigh 4y ago
    What are some examples? Most foreigners I know in Tokyo work in tech and make much more than the median Tokyo citizen.
    - jbay808 4y ago
      Generally, it would be people coming from anywhere with a higher median multiple than Tokyo. (That is, ratio of median housing price to median household income). For example Vancouver, with a median multiple of 11.9 (in 2019) will have a lot of people who think Tokyo's ~4.7 seems very affordable by comparison, even though 4.7 is not considered affordable in absolute terms. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_multiple https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_multiple
      - endisneigh 4y ago
        That's not really relevant - what's relevant is how much the migrants are making in Tokyo. Presumably they are making much more than the average Tokyo citizen which is why it's perceived as affordable, and is my point.
jfoster 4y ago
I don't like it when articles are premised on facts that are objectively false. > the population of Tokyo is still growing! It was, but now it's not: https://www.nippon.com/en/japan-data/h01310/ https://www.nippon.com/en/japan-data/h01310/
mellavora 4y ago
I'm seeing lots of comments suggesting that anything smaller than the US McMansion is too small. without realizing that this is a historical anomaly.
franciscop 4y ago
I live in Tokyo and know the author, and have had many conversations/discussions with him and other foreigners here. We disagree a bunch of times! But we do agree it's an interesting topic. IMHO it all boils down to: - Tech pays disproportionately high in Tokyo so yes, it's "affordable" for us. - If you come from anglo-saxon countries mainly (USA, London, AUS/NZ), Tokyo will seem dirt cheap. - If you come from cheaper countries like me from Spain, Tokyo will seem alright, not too cheap not too expensive. - Definitely doesn't seem "one of the most expensive cities in the world" as many people say, and I think that's the key to understand the whole article/author point of view. The issue is IMHO that Japan, Spain and USA are used to very different standards of living in many regards, so it's just impossible for a straight comparison (the markets I know best). For example, in Japan people are used to 1h+ daily train commute, readers here from the USA are likely used to 1h+ daily car commute, and I'm used to walk across my home city in ~30 min. This makes me prioritize a walking neighborhood near my job (I can walk there in ~40 min in Tokyo), but that means I had to choose either crazy expensive or tiny appt. Same for house sizes, Japan is a lot smaller but smart about it, (like in boats where every small crevice is taken advantage of), while in Spain it's usual to have a guest/secondary room, and in the USA within that driving time people might even have a whole "laundry room". Another bit of cultural difference is seen in "America’s largest city, New York started construction on just under 30,000 new housing units in 2020 while Tokyo started constructing 130,000 units."; while it's probably true that the USA needs to build more, Japan sins on the opposite end of the spectrum where they build very cheap and demolish it after 20-40 years. I'd like to see a rate of "housing built vs demolished" to present these numbers as a net positive difference.
- midoridensha 4y ago
  >Japan sins on the opposite end of the spectrum where they build very cheap and demolish it after 20-40 years. I'd like to see a rate of "housing built vs demolished" to present these numbers as a net positive difference. There's a good reason for that: in Japanese experience, older houses = more likely to collapse in an earthquake. Who wants to take that risk? Also, building "very cheap" is part of why housing is more affordable here; instead of prioritizing "character", they prioritize efficiency, safety, and affordability, and striking a balance between those. So if you go looking at buildings constructed within the same timeframe, they tend to all look alike inside, using the same construction materials. You have a point with net change being overlooked though. I have observed here that it's very common to demolish older multi-unit buildings and replace them with taller ones, so there is a net gain, but not as much as you'd think by ignoring the number of units demolished. >The issue is IMHO that Japan, Spain and USA are used to very different standards of living in many regards, so it's just impossible for a straight comparison This is exactly right. I find it really frustrating to try to talk about this stuff with Americans because they simply cannot comprehend a comparison based on anything besides $/square foot. So I try to put it in terms of "how much does rent cost for the average person", and some people will get it then, but not many. >- Tech pays disproportionately high in Tokyo so yes, it's "affordable" for us. It does pay higher than typical local salaries, but compared to American salaries for similar jobs it's a fraction as much (esp. with the current lousy exchange rate), so it's not as "affordable" as it might seem to someone making an American tech salary. Still quite comfortable in local terms though.

39 points by Gatsky 4y ago

nimbyism has become a structural issue since we allowed real estate to became an asset class rather than primarily a place to live. It's not just a case of rich people being d1cks - it is this too - but also because so many home owners now depend on house price inflation for future retirement. This was actually a central part of the 'American dream' and actively sold to the people as the way to get ahead.

jmeister 4y ago
"The fact that real estate in FL or TX has melted up over the past 2-3 years is not evidence of succeeding to build a better model than California, it's evidence that they are becoming like California." -- Peter Thiel at NatCon 2022
kache_ 4y ago
downstream effect of debasing currency
anovikov 4y ago
Question must be - why? Why owning stocks wasn't pushed nearly as intensely? It makes more benefit to the economy (to say the least). Is it just the Red Scare that motivated that course of action of the government?
- mschuster91 4y ago
  > Why owning stocks wasn't pushed nearly as intensely? From an European POV, you Americans already push stocks and individual retirement savings like they are a golden calf with your 401k plans and the slaughter of actual pension systems. As for home ownership: it certainly is better in retirement if you own your paid-off home and only have to foot property tax, utilities and a savings fund for renovation out of your retirement accounts or pension payments.
  - mellavora 4y ago
    Assuming increases in property tax (to fund city/state pensions and needed renovations to infrastructure) don't force you out of your home.
  - anovikov 4y ago
    "actual" pension system is a lie, it's merely a Ponzi scheme. So Americans are doing that one right.
  - choko 4y ago
    There are pension systems in the USA dependening on industry. The issue is that the pension systems have to depend on an ever-increasing pool of contributors which is not sustainable long term.
    - anovikov 4y ago
      Exactly. They are a scam. Not more sustainable than Madoff scheme.
  - midoridensha 4y ago
    >the slaughter of actual pension systems. What are you talking about? Government-run pension systems, or company-run ones? The government-run one is called "Social Security" and it hasn't gone anywhere, and certainly hasn't been "slaughtered". It hasn't changed in ages really; the problem is there's fewer contributors and more recipients now due to population aging, so when the surplus runs out in 15 years, it'll be restricted to only incoming funds, so recipients will receive less. Company-run pensions are indeed dead in America, for good reason, being replaced by 401k plans. Why would you want your retirement security tied to your former employer? What happens when the company mismanages the pension, or the company fails? This has happened many times here, with older people losing everything except the social security which isn't that much. That's why they moved to the 401k system, so retirement funds are put into the hands of a better-regulated 3rd party financial firm to be invested in securities. I don't see the problem here. I have my issues with many things in America, but this is one thing they did right. It could be better: some 401k providers are much better than others, for instance (some have poor securities selections available, some have high fees, etc.), but overall it's much better than the old days of having a company pension.
- implements 4y ago
  I’ve wondered that. If innovation has an optimal economically efficient rate then would businesses wasting inflated stock market capital chasing competitive advantage ‘before it’s time’ be a good thing? (Heretical thought) Perhaps when there’s too much money effectively forced into poor investment opportunities (stocks, housing, whatever) countries would be better off taxing and investing it in education, infrastructure, energy security, etc - things that help generate better and wider returns in the future?
  - anovikov 4y ago
    Education - i doubt it has much room for growth. It already reached a phase where people who are too dumb to get any kind of degree are chasing degrees that will bring them no benefit in life. If anything, there needs to be a crackdown on higher education to prevent too many people from wasting the most productive years of their lives for nothing, instead of yeah, spending them building infrastructure (roads, bridges, etc).
mellavora 4y ago
NIMBYism has been a structural issue since Hoover first signed zoning laws in 1924 while service as Secretary of Commerce. The default of those laws has been to deny permissions. Yes, zoning is local. But read the history to find out where it started and how it was decided that this was a local power. https://economics21.org/history-zoning-america-flexible-housing-approach https://economics21.org/history-zoning-america-flexible-hous... Also note that this government regulation hinders the power of the free market to meet the population's housing needs. Japan takes a different approach to zoning, thus allowing market forces to better serve the people.

jaclaz 4y ago

Hmmmm. IMHO a very peculiar take on the matter, it is the first time that I read that Tokyio has affordable housing (or maybe it has if compared to New York, or London, but these are - as I see it - outliers when it comes to prices). In any case attributing the difference entirely to the zoning laws seems to me baseless and definitely an oversimplification. Generally speaking zoning laws can make a substantial difference in house prices where they are simple AND there is land available, but where very little land is available?

midoridensha 4y ago
There's plenty of land in Tokyo, it's just all used for something, not sitting empty, which I would think is the case for any normal city. The zoning laws means that land can be reused, at any time, for housing if some company thinks it's more profitable to build a housing building there than a warehouse or a store. Restrictive zoning means only a portion of the land can be used for housing, and can never be turned into housing as land becomes more valuable. The amount of land is irrelevant. Go back and look at the article, in particular the picture of the NYC zoning map. Only certain portions of the total land is actually usable as housing. In Tokyo, this just isn't the case: almost all of it is. You can't tear down an old warehouse in NYC and build a condo tower there, at least not without a lot of political difficulty. In Tokyo, it's pretty trivial.
- jaclaz 4y ago
  Look, "available land" means "land that is not used". It is clear that more flexible zoning laws allows for easier re-use, if there are abandoned old warehouses and other limitations (height of buildings) do not exist, then this may contribute to more availability and lower prices, but you need many, many converted old warehouses to make a dent in availability, and not necessarily large availability drives prices down. Differences in zoning laws have a relatively high impact in places where there is plenty of available, unused, land.
hgfdhgdfhgf 4y ago
Their argument is not baseless at all. Zoning laws ban the building of new homes in certain zones. Zones which do allow housing in America are height restricted and area restricted. Tokyo allows house building homes in every zone but two. This includes building homes on top of existing buildings where "very little land is available".

makach 4y ago

web archive; https://web.archive.org/web/20220919083040/https://www.konichivalue.com/p/contrarian-investing-how-tokyo-avoided https://web.archive.org/web/20220919083040/https://www.konic...

Markoff 4y ago

They don't, house prices in Tokyo are anything but affordable. "The price of new apartments in Tokyo toppled a 30-year-old record in 2021 as rising demand from dual-income households and increasing construction costs boosted the Japanese capital’s once-moribund housing market." https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-25/apartment-prices-in-tokyo-are-set-to-exceed-bubble-era-high https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-25/apartment... "Tokyo is one of the most expensive cities in the world, so there is no doubt that Tokyo house prices are also very costly." https://questionjapan.com/blog/location-guides/tokyo-house-prices/ https://questionjapan.com/blog/location-guides/tokyo-house-p...

midoridensha 4y ago
This is basically BS; housing in Tokyo is only expensive from an American point-of-view because Americans only look at $/square foot, and don't realize not everyone wants or needs a palatial home. 25m^2 apartments are very common in Tokyo and generally affordable by normal people, but such a compact place would probably be downright illegal in America because of housing codes. Try getting a nice, safe, comfortable, and modern apartment in NYC on USD$1000/month; I don't think it's possible. In Tokyo, it's common. Also, Tokyo being one of the most expensive cities to live in is a myth, so any source that makes that claim is, to me, immediately disqualified as having truthful information. Going out to eat here costs a fraction of what it does almost anywhere in the US.
- NhanH 4y ago
  25m^2 is way way too small for a comfortable life though. For single, you want around 50-60 m2 and 80m2 for a family of 3.
  - innocenat 4y ago
    Strongly disagree as someone who live in 20m^2 for the past 5 years. Public space like parks and the walkability of the neighborhood are very important factor for comfortable living in small space. Both of which Japan do very well.

yellow_lead 4y ago

> Tokyo's population is growing faster than New York and London, but its housing prices are less than half. How? > The current metro area population of Tokyo in 2022 is 37,274,000, a 0.18% decline from 2021. [1] > The current metro area population of New York City in 2022 is 18,867,000, a 0.23% increase from 2021. [2] For the past 4 years this hasn't been true, year over year. [1] https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/21671/tokyo/population https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/21671/tokyo/population [2] https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/23083/new-york-city/population https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/23083/new-york-city/popul...

trinovantes 4y ago
The only way you can get 37 million people in Tokyo is if you account for the entire Tokyo prefecture (similar to state/province). The western parts are largely rural and accounts for most of the population decline. The actual urban area in the central wards are still growing. https://japanpropertycentral.com/2022/08/central-tokyos-population-continues-to-grow/ https://japanpropertycentral.com/2022/08/central-tokyos-popu...
- marcinzm 4y ago
  I mean if you restrict things enough than any metric is possible. Looking at 500k people (your link) out of 37m (Tokyo Prefecture) or 9m (Tokyo 23 Wards) I feel isn't the best metric.
  - trinovantes 4y ago
    Probably best to just restrict both NYC/Tokyo to their urban areas and their respective housing costs which is what this blog post is originally about. Otherwise, you can just say there are "free" homes in "Tokyo" because there's a lot of abandoned homes in the rural parts that you can squat. For Tokyo, I think discussions about population change should be focused on the 23 central wards. Here's a more up-to-date source: https://www.toukei.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/jsuikei/js-index.htm https://www.toukei.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/jsuikei/js-index.htm (it seems to be 14mil today vs 9mil in 2016)

ekianjo 4y ago

Lol this has to be the worst headline ever. Tokyo is nowhere affordable unless you have a SV salary while living in Japan. Median Japanese salaries are not high and that is precisely why people commute from very far away to go to work in Tokyo.

fomine3 4y ago
Japanese are fine without SV salary because they don't want big house like SV
- ekianjo 4y ago
  its not that they dont want, they were never given the choice. I can guarantee that very rich Japanese people enjoy big houses.
  - fomine3 4y ago
    It's true that people live smaller house than they want, but the size shouldn't be too big. Metropolis with great public transport or good city with big house and car, pick one. Riches can have big house and a car in the metropolis but it's impossible everyone to have. For who prefer big house, they can live in local cities if they can remote work
    - ekianjo 4y ago
      > For who prefer big house, they can live in local cities if they can remote work If you want to have a family you basically can't live in a small cramped apartment in the city. That's why families with kids move out and people commute like crazy.
bamboozled 4y ago
This comment is real and should not be down voted.
innocenat 4y ago
6m/year is more than median income but is nowhere near SV salary and I know tons of people living in central Tokyo on that salary.

hgfdhgdfhgf 4y ago

I'm not sure if the people here who say Tokyo is not affordable are reading the article. Tokyo is affordable compared to similar cities like NYC. Tokyo built 130,000 new homes vs NYC's 30,000 in 2020. Tokyo's average home price is $300,000 compared to NYC's at $778,000+.

marcinzm 4y ago
I just Googled those claims. Comparing the average house price of the Greater Tokyo Metropolitan Area (5200 mi^2) to NYC (472.43 mi^2) is really a biased comparison. I suspect the houses built metric is similarly taken out of context possibly due to houses being torn down (more common in Japan than the US) meaning there's isn't as much of a net new home build up.
- anovikov 4y ago
  Maybe this is the whole point. Tokyo has public transport system that makes commute across such a vast area possible, and this is what explains property prices.
  - marcinzm 4y ago
    There is a whole NYC Metropolitan Area which spans 4669 mi^2.
    - hgfdhgdfhgf 4y ago
      What is the average home price in the "whole NYC Metropolitan Area"?
      - marcinzm 4y ago
        You're free to do that research, I posted not to make any specific argument but simply to point out that making out of context claims isn't cool.

bamboozled 4y ago

Tokyo is affordable, if you make a lot of money. If you like to commute for 1.5-3 hours a day its affordable.

jansan 4y ago

Here is the historical data for Japan's residential poperty prices. Make sure to set the start date in the chart to 1980 (direct link with these parameters does not seem possible) to know how cazy it was in the late 80s/early 90s. https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/japan/real-residential-property-price-index https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/japan/real-residential...

jbay808 4y ago

Zoning, as the article mentions, is one important element. I think there are others. The excellent transit system, and cultural acceptance of small homes for example.

sanxiyn 4y ago
I think these articles should explain difference between Tokyo and Seoul. South Korea basically copied Japan's zoning system, it is inclusive, central, etc. and Seoul has excellent transit and Koreans are (although not to the extent of Japanese) fine with small homes and high density. Still Seoul is nearly 2x as expensive as Tokyo.
- jbay808 4y ago
  Good points. I wonder to what extent the Japanese real estate bubble pop of 1992 played a role. Housing in Tokyo was sky-high in 1989, to be sure, despite their zoning rules being enacted in 1968.

endisneigh 4y ago

United states is already more affordable than most of the world if you use median income to dollars per sqft per month in rent. The whole Tokyo is so cheap meme really has to die. It’s just a bunch of rich foreigners enjoying purchasing power differences. Average Tokyo people on average Tokyo wages certainly do not think it is so cheap. Go watch Asian boss on YouTube.

jbay808 4y ago
> It’s just a bunch of rich foreigners enjoying purchasing power differences. Not all foreigners who consider the grass greener in Tokyo are American or have a purchasing power advantage. Some just come from an area where housing affordability makes Tokyo look good.
- endisneigh 4y ago
  What are some examples? Most foreigners I know in Tokyo work in tech and make much more than the median Tokyo citizen.
  - jbay808 4y ago
    Generally, it would be people coming from anywhere with a higher median multiple than Tokyo. (That is, ratio of median housing price to median household income). For example Vancouver, with a median multiple of 11.9 (in 2019) will have a lot of people who think Tokyo's ~4.7 seems very affordable by comparison, even though 4.7 is not considered affordable in absolute terms. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_multiple https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_multiple
    - endisneigh 4y ago
      That's not really relevant - what's relevant is how much the migrants are making in Tokyo. Presumably they are making much more than the average Tokyo citizen which is why it's perceived as affordable, and is my point.

jfoster 4y ago

I don't like it when articles are premised on facts that are objectively false. > the population of Tokyo is still growing! It was, but now it's not: https://www.nippon.com/en/japan-data/h01310/ https://www.nippon.com/en/japan-data/h01310/

mellavora 4y ago

I'm seeing lots of comments suggesting that anything smaller than the US McMansion is too small. without realizing that this is a historical anomaly.

franciscop 4y ago

I live in Tokyo and know the author, and have had many conversations/discussions with him and other foreigners here. We disagree a bunch of times! But we do agree it's an interesting topic. IMHO it all boils down to: - Tech pays disproportionately high in Tokyo so yes, it's "affordable" for us. - If you come from anglo-saxon countries mainly (USA, London, AUS/NZ), Tokyo will seem dirt cheap. - If you come from cheaper countries like me from Spain, Tokyo will seem alright, not too cheap not too expensive. - Definitely doesn't seem "one of the most expensive cities in the world" as many people say, and I think that's the key to understand the whole article/author point of view. The issue is IMHO that Japan, Spain and USA are used to very different standards of living in many regards, so it's just impossible for a straight comparison (the markets I know best). For example, in Japan people are used to 1h+ daily train commute, readers here from the USA are likely used to 1h+ daily car commute, and I'm used to walk across my home city in ~30 min. This makes me prioritize a walking neighborhood near my job (I can walk there in ~40 min in Tokyo), but that means I had to choose either crazy expensive or tiny appt. Same for house sizes, Japan is a lot smaller but smart about it, (like in boats where every small crevice is taken advantage of), while in Spain it's usual to have a guest/secondary room, and in the USA within that driving time people might even have a whole "laundry room". Another bit of cultural difference is seen in "America’s largest city, New York started construction on just under 30,000 new housing units in 2020 while Tokyo started constructing 130,000 units."; while it's probably true that the USA needs to build more, Japan sins on the opposite end of the spectrum where they build very cheap and demolish it after 20-40 years. I'd like to see a rate of "housing built vs demolished" to present these numbers as a net positive difference.

midoridensha 4y ago
>Japan sins on the opposite end of the spectrum where they build very cheap and demolish it after 20-40 years. I'd like to see a rate of "housing built vs demolished" to present these numbers as a net positive difference. There's a good reason for that: in Japanese experience, older houses = more likely to collapse in an earthquake. Who wants to take that risk? Also, building "very cheap" is part of why housing is more affordable here; instead of prioritizing "character", they prioritize efficiency, safety, and affordability, and striking a balance between those. So if you go looking at buildings constructed within the same timeframe, they tend to all look alike inside, using the same construction materials. You have a point with net change being overlooked though. I have observed here that it's very common to demolish older multi-unit buildings and replace them with taller ones, so there is a net gain, but not as much as you'd think by ignoring the number of units demolished. >The issue is IMHO that Japan, Spain and USA are used to very different standards of living in many regards, so it's just impossible for a straight comparison This is exactly right. I find it really frustrating to try to talk about this stuff with Americans because they simply cannot comprehend a comparison based on anything besides $/square foot. So I try to put it in terms of "how much does rent cost for the average person", and some people will get it then, but not many. >- Tech pays disproportionately high in Tokyo so yes, it's "affordable" for us. It does pay higher than typical local salaries, but compared to American salaries for similar jobs it's a fraction as much (esp. with the current lousy exchange rate), so it's not as "affordable" as it might seem to someone making an American tech salary. Still quite comfortable in local terms though.