4 ms·

Interfering in the market always makes the outcome worse because it increases costs for both buyers and sellers. Crazy real estate prices are caused by NIMBYs

Interfering in the market always makes the outcome worse because it increases costs for both buyers and sellers. Crazy real estate prices are caused by NIMBYs blocking new builds - heavy interfering. Check out this graph of new builds in the States. Zoom out to max. Note how it’s basically flat with some ups and downs. It should go up exponentially with the population. https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/housing-starts https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/housing-starts Here’s a sheet from the gov that seems to show something similar: https://www.census.gov/construction/nrc/xls/starts_cust.xls https://www.census.gov/construction/nrc/xls/starts_cust.xls

ehnto 4y ago
I don't disagree with your point about nimbyism, but I don't think that proves allowing corporations to buy those same finite assets up would be any better. Then you just have the same asset bubble but instead controlled by a corporation with even less interest in affordability or maintaining a community.
- FredPret 4y ago
  Corporations will deploy massed capital in pursuit of higher profit. If we stop all meddling in the housing market, this will result in much more new housing being built. We need millions of new units. The capital for that can come from individuals or corporations, but corporations are just a way to pool capital and seems like a quicker and more effective approach. No corporation in any industry has ever cared about community and affordability. And yet these things have emerged multiple times wherever sane, free markets exist.
Eisenstein 4y ago
A non-regulated market cannot be a free market on any decent time scale. Without ensuring fairness by government bad actors will capture the market, externalize costs, and work against the public interest. Are you saying that regulation (market interference) is universally bad?

ehnto 4y ago

I don't disagree with your point about nimbyism, but I don't think that proves allowing corporations to buy those same finite assets up would be any better. Then you just have the same asset bubble but instead controlled by a corporation with even less interest in affordability or maintaining a community.

FredPret 4y ago
Corporations will deploy massed capital in pursuit of higher profit. If we stop all meddling in the housing market, this will result in much more new housing being built. We need millions of new units. The capital for that can come from individuals or corporations, but corporations are just a way to pool capital and seems like a quicker and more effective approach. No corporation in any industry has ever cared about community and affordability. And yet these things have emerged multiple times wherever sane, free markets exist.

Eisenstein 4y ago

A non-regulated market cannot be a free market on any decent time scale. Without ensuring fairness by government bad actors will capture the market, externalize costs, and work against the public interest. Are you saying that regulation (market interference) is universally bad?