5 ms·

People really need to be asking themselves, “Why isn’t new housing being built?” and focus on removing the barriers to building new housing. Pricing algorithms

People really need to be asking themselves, “Why isn’t new housing being built?” and focus on removing the barriers to building new housing. Pricing algorithms wouldn’t be such an issue if it were easy to add new supply.

anigbrowl 4y ago
People also need to be asking themselves 'who opposes new builds, and where do their political donations go.' Property owners as an economic bloc are not passive political price takers, they lobby for their own interests and tend to be much more organized than tenants.
Plasmoid 4y ago
Largely it's because the existing residents don't want people moving in. They liked how the neighborhood was before and they want it to remain static. To this end, you get zoning rules, ever tightening building codes, impact fees, taxes, public hearings, and just straight up prohibitions on building.
- anm89 4y ago
  Because we have an overabundance of housing for one. Massive portions of our housing supply are sucked up as STRs and and second and third houses due to a decade of free money. On top of that we have all time record numbers of houses set to be completed over the next few months which are still being snapped up by investors. We have a shortage of available housing. Not a shortage of housing (there are individual markets where this isn't true and there are actually shortages of physical units). Fortunately, this is to some degree in the process of correcting itself but I doubt the place we get to is going to be a solution that very many people are happy with either.
  - Plasmoid 4y ago
    > Because we have an overabundance of housing for one. I've seen this canard so many times it physically hurts me. I don't know where you found this so it's hard to provide specific debunking so I'll just go over all of them. 1) The houses aren't where people actually want to live. There is a lot of vacant housing in dying rural towns, mining sites, or the middle of nowhere. So unless you have a plan to get people to move to Buffalo-Butte then available housing there may as well not exist. 2) The most of the "vacant" homes aren't actually vacant. Depending on how badly the stats are gathered they will include a lot of garbage. Let's look at the list of things that considered vacant: - Houses on the market for rent/sale - Houses that have been rented/sold but not yet moved into - Houses that unfit for human habitation - Houses undergoing significant renovations - Houses that are used seasonally That's right, if your house burns down the still-smouldering rubble is considered vacant. There is just not enough housing where people want to live. Objections like this only get brought up when someone is about a half-step away from proposition house rationing. Not for them though, other people should have their housing rationed.
    - anm89 4y ago
      Yeah well, if you sit around in the couple of places that have no housing and hate building housing, surprise, there's not going to be available housing and quality of life is going to be awful. If that's the battle you want to fight in life more power to you. If you want to battle your way through needles and shit and piss and the mentally ill and drug addicted to go sit in an fancier office and to live in a city with some cool restaurants so you can pay 6k a month for a 400sqft apartment or have roommates at 30 feel free to do it. But I really have minimal sympathy for people who sign up for this and then complain loudly about how much it sucks.

anigbrowl 4y ago

People also need to be asking themselves 'who opposes new builds, and where do their political donations go.' Property owners as an economic bloc are not passive political price takers, they lobby for their own interests and tend to be much more organized than tenants.

Plasmoid 4y ago

Largely it's because the existing residents don't want people moving in. They liked how the neighborhood was before and they want it to remain static. To this end, you get zoning rules, ever tightening building codes, impact fees, taxes, public hearings, and just straight up prohibitions on building.

anm89 4y ago
Because we have an overabundance of housing for one. Massive portions of our housing supply are sucked up as STRs and and second and third houses due to a decade of free money. On top of that we have all time record numbers of houses set to be completed over the next few months which are still being snapped up by investors. We have a shortage of available housing. Not a shortage of housing (there are individual markets where this isn't true and there are actually shortages of physical units). Fortunately, this is to some degree in the process of correcting itself but I doubt the place we get to is going to be a solution that very many people are happy with either.
- Plasmoid 4y ago
  > Because we have an overabundance of housing for one. I've seen this canard so many times it physically hurts me. I don't know where you found this so it's hard to provide specific debunking so I'll just go over all of them. 1) The houses aren't where people actually want to live. There is a lot of vacant housing in dying rural towns, mining sites, or the middle of nowhere. So unless you have a plan to get people to move to Buffalo-Butte then available housing there may as well not exist. 2) The most of the "vacant" homes aren't actually vacant. Depending on how badly the stats are gathered they will include a lot of garbage. Let's look at the list of things that considered vacant: - Houses on the market for rent/sale - Houses that have been rented/sold but not yet moved into - Houses that unfit for human habitation - Houses undergoing significant renovations - Houses that are used seasonally That's right, if your house burns down the still-smouldering rubble is considered vacant. There is just not enough housing where people want to live. Objections like this only get brought up when someone is about a half-step away from proposition house rationing. Not for them though, other people should have their housing rationed.
  - anm89 4y ago
    Yeah well, if you sit around in the couple of places that have no housing and hate building housing, surprise, there's not going to be available housing and quality of life is going to be awful. If that's the battle you want to fight in life more power to you. If you want to battle your way through needles and shit and piss and the mentally ill and drug addicted to go sit in an fancier office and to live in a city with some cool restaurants so you can pay 6k a month for a 400sqft apartment or have roommates at 30 feel free to do it. But I really have minimal sympathy for people who sign up for this and then complain loudly about how much it sucks.