4 ms·
The point is that housing costs would have gone up more if that housing wasn't built, not that some amount of built housing automatically means prices grow slow
by ericholscher 3y ago
The point is that housing costs would have gone up more if that housing wasn't built, not that some amount of built housing automatically means prices grow slower than inflation.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- JohnFen 3y agoThat seems pretty speculative. But even if it's true, that means that just building a bunch of new housing isn't addressing the problem.
- seryoiupfurds 3y agoIt just means that we need to build even more new housing to keep up with the demand, and that the situation would have been even worse if we hadn't built what we have.
- HDThoreaun 3y agoThe problem is that there is not enough housing for the people who want to live there. Building more is the only way to address that problem other than exclusing people who want to live there.
- JohnFen 3y agoBut the problem is that there is little economic incentive to build more than is being built. The housing is being built for wealthy people. If most of those people aren't trading up from less expensive units, then that doesn't vacate any less expensive units. So, outside of the wealthy crowd, there is little downward price pressure in housing.