6 ms·

But Tokyo has accommodated growth without rent increasing significantly. No US city can say the same (edit: zip1234 proves me wrong below.)

by lukasb 3y ago

endisneigh 3y ago
Tokyo, and Japan, is a stagnant nation population wise and GDP wise. Not sure why people even bother using it as an example. Look no further than the USD:YEN conversion. funny how no one can cite any other city. if the theory was true there should be dozens of examples.
- zip1234 3y ago
  Tokyo's population has grown while prices for housing have remained constant. For another example of building more housing keeping prices down, look at Houston. https://fee.org/articles/how-spontaneous-order-keeps-houston-affordable/ https://fee.org/articles/how-spontaneous-order-keeps-houston...
  - endisneigh 3y ago
    the assertion is that building more reduces prices, not merely keeps them the same, though. and it's complicated to say that tokyo population has grown while prices for houses remain constant. what has happened to the other areas? how has the median wage changed?
    - crooked-v 3y ago
      > the assertion is that building more reduces prices, not merely keeps them the same, though Building more reduces prices below what they would have been if that building didn't happen.
      - endisneigh 3y ago
        > Building more reduces prices below what they would have been if that building didn't happen. seems like moving the goal posts. it's only expensive to begin with due to the density and subsequent amenities enabled by such. why is for example Manhattan more expensive than Brooklyn? it's more dense, should be cheaper accordingly to the density makes cheaper logic. people keep moving the goal posts, but anyone can go on Redfin and figure this out themselves. look at the median rent, find the median wage, find the median sq footage. calculate the adjusted wage by sq/ft. it's not higher in dense areas.
        crooked-v 3y ago
        > why is for example Manhattan more expensive than Brooklyn? it's more dense, should be cheaper accordingly to the density makes cheaper logic. It's more expensive because many more people want to live there than want to live in Brooklyn, outstripping the available housing to a greater degree. It's basic supply and demand.
tivert 3y ago
> But Tokyo has accommodated growth without rent increasing significantly. No US city can say the same. Isn't Tokyo famous for stuff like tiny, tiny microapartments? Are the rent increases comparisons you allude to measured per apartment or per square foot?

But Tokyo has accommodated growth without rent increasing significantly. No US city can say the same (edit: zip1234 proves me wrong below.)

by lukasb 3y ago

But Tokyo has accommodated growth without rent increasing significantly. No US city can say the same (edit: zip1234 proves me wrong below.)

endisneigh 3y ago

Tokyo, and Japan, is a stagnant nation population wise and GDP wise. Not sure why people even bother using it as an example. Look no further than the USD:YEN conversion. funny how no one can cite any other city. if the theory was true there should be dozens of examples.

zip1234 3y ago
Tokyo's population has grown while prices for housing have remained constant. For another example of building more housing keeping prices down, look at Houston. https://fee.org/articles/how-spontaneous-order-keeps-houston-affordable/ https://fee.org/articles/how-spontaneous-order-keeps-houston...
- endisneigh 3y ago
  the assertion is that building more reduces prices, not merely keeps them the same, though. and it's complicated to say that tokyo population has grown while prices for houses remain constant. what has happened to the other areas? how has the median wage changed?
  - crooked-v 3y ago
    > the assertion is that building more reduces prices, not merely keeps them the same, though Building more reduces prices below what they would have been if that building didn't happen.
    - endisneigh 3y ago
      > Building more reduces prices below what they would have been if that building didn't happen. seems like moving the goal posts. it's only expensive to begin with due to the density and subsequent amenities enabled by such. why is for example Manhattan more expensive than Brooklyn? it's more dense, should be cheaper accordingly to the density makes cheaper logic. people keep moving the goal posts, but anyone can go on Redfin and figure this out themselves. look at the median rent, find the median wage, find the median sq footage. calculate the adjusted wage by sq/ft. it's not higher in dense areas.
      - crooked-v 3y ago
        > why is for example Manhattan more expensive than Brooklyn? it's more dense, should be cheaper accordingly to the density makes cheaper logic. It's more expensive because many more people want to live there than want to live in Brooklyn, outstripping the available housing to a greater degree. It's basic supply and demand.

tivert 3y ago

> But Tokyo has accommodated growth without rent increasing significantly. No US city can say the same. Isn't Tokyo famous for stuff like tiny, tiny microapartments? Are the rent increases comparisons you allude to measured per apartment or per square foot?