4 ms·
So the tl;dr is that building more housing, of any kind, will alleviate prices at the lower end of the market. I think this makes a lot of sense, though I find
by roxgib 4y ago
So the tl;dr is that building more housing, of any kind, will alleviate prices at the lower end of the market. I think this makes a lot of sense, though I find it weird that he starts off by saying that new construction doesn't have any impact, and then finishes by saying the opposite. I hear this same thing a lot from economists who say the impact of new construction is too small because it only accounts for <1% of the total housing stock each year at best, but that doesn't make sense to me - what other levers are you going to pull? Immigration?
Anyway, I'm putting all my hopes on remote work.
- et1337 4y agoI think the article is saying that new construction of all kinds of homes, including luxury homes, is the answer. As opposed to the meager handful of affordable housing units cities fund now while making it as hard as possible to build anything at all.
- yazaddaruvala 4y agoCreate High-density Land Use taxes that roughly force people to sell parking lots and gas stations and other small buildings for tall housing developments? Enforce super blocks that are equally residential as they are comercial? ie if X job spaces exist in a super block there should be slightly more than X bedrooms available in the same super block. Target 100x more sqft by 2030? Instead of targeting 1%^7 more sqft by 2030
- charlieflowers 4y agoI don’t think that’s what he’s saying. He says new housing is underpowered. Rather, we need home values to decline instead of rise as properties age. And yet, too many have vested interests in them rising, making that the prevailing political context.