8 ms·

Most Metro areas do not have enough affordable housing. It's well established that local governments cannot build enough new affordable housing, partly because

Most Metro areas do not have enough affordable housing. It's well established that local governments cannot build enough new affordable housing, partly because any contractor that bids goes way over the value of a private housing venture. The idea that there's enough housing but "in the wrong place" is like saying there's plenty of jobs, they're just in third world countries and Scandinavia. The idea that the solution is "play Robin Hood with the global economy" is literally a fairy tale.

jmclnx 3y ago
>Most Metro areas do not have enough affordable housing. Not only that, the definition of "affordable housing" is skewed. In the big metro area near me, "affordable housing" means 1500 to 2000 USD per month. That is not affordable to any normal person. To me, affordable rent should be below 1000 USD. You think this homeless crises is bad, wait 30 years and then you will see Cities with large slums like many "third" world countries have. And yes, it is the Gov. job to fix this, but the politicians wants to continue receiving their "bribes" from companies, some of which are buying up rental properties as fast as they become available. Ever see "cash for your house" ? Those properties are probably being bought up for use with AirBNB or being turned into rentals for around 3000 USD.
- no_wizard 3y ago
  ProPublica did a whole series on one of the larger "Cash for your house" type businesses. It seems they're really trying to extract cheap homes from distressed sellers with pressure tactics[0][1][2][3] [0]: https://www.propublica.org/article/ugly-truth-behind-we-buy-ugly-houses https://www.propublica.org/article/ugly-truth-behind-we-buy-... [1]: https://www.propublica.org/article/behind-the-scenes-of-we-buy-ugly-houses-deal https://www.propublica.org/article/behind-the-scenes-of-we-b... [2]: https://www.propublica.org/article/state-federal-laws-do-little-protect-homeowners-we-buy-ugly-houses-deals https://www.propublica.org/article/state-federal-laws-do-lit... [3]: https://www.propublica.org/article/want-to-sell-home-for-cash-read-this-first https://www.propublica.org/article/want-to-sell-home-for-cas...
  - bombcar 3y ago
    The other side of this "scam" is that people are being sold how to "get rich quick" in real estate for $5k seminars (which boil down to "offer people 30% below market value and hope you get people who are dumb/desperate enough to sell").
somewhereoutth 3y ago
Let's take SF as an example. If a significant number of new units were built (somehow without detracting from the character of the city), would it really lower prices much? Likely not - instead prices would dip just enough to make it viable for large numbers of high income people from outside SF to come to the city (which by massing effect may make SF even more desirable, so actually higher prices!) Wealth taxes are not a fairly tale, though of course they are a nightmare for the excessively wealthy! In the UK we used death duties to finish off the aristocracy.
- sokoloff 3y ago
  If it works temporarily, but gets consumed by induced demand, then do it again. And then again. And then again. This is a good thing. If SF is so great, many more people will be able to go there.
  - seanmcdirmid 3y ago
    So you are claiming that if SF becomes as dense as Manhattan, it will be as cheap as Manhattan? Or maybe Hong Kong’s density and housing affordability is the target here? The ideal situation is Tokyo, where a lack of culture in speculating on housing coupled with population decreases leads (going down in the metro area for the last three years) to housing affordability.
    - sokoloff 3y ago
      I'm claiming that the balance of supply and demand affects housing prices. If you increase the supply by enough, that will tip the balance to where the market clearing price will go down.
      - bombcar 3y ago
        The real underlying problem is that you have X million people who want to live in the quaint version of San Francisco. It's literally impossible; the quaint version dies at some point as more and more people are piled in, even if the resulting city is world-class and quite desirable. Just like the entirety of Los Angeles couldn't move to Santa Barbara without Santa Barbara being changed forever. The closest reasonable equivalent we can do is maintain the quaint "old town" and build a "real city" around it where people actually live and work, and the old town remains as a tourist destination, basically. This is the case in much of Europe. The Paris you visit and the Paris people live in are often mixed, but they're noticeably different. Rapid mass transit to city centers can hide the distinction.
jwestbury 3y ago
> Most Metro areas do not have enough affordable housing. There's no such thing as affordable housing[0]. Just housing. You can certainly argue that building a house is too expensive -- and due to NIMBYism, discriminatory policies, and anti-density regulatory environments, this is often true -- but affordability is not an intrinsic value of a building, and the problem is generally that housing stock simply doesn't keep up with demand in places which demand lots of housing (e.g., San Francisco, Seattle, NYC, London, etc.). 0. https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2023/1/3/theres-no-such-thing-as-affordable-housing https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2023/1/3/theres-no-such-...
- NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
  That's a pithy, contrarian slogan, not a statement of fact. "Affordable Housing" is a term of art with a specific definition, and yes, it really exists, all over these United States. Also, if you want to use it colloquially, then housing is, by definition, affordable for most of the people who live in housing and are not running a spending deficit.
  - diogenes4 3y ago
    What is that specific definition? It seems in many cases the term is used to AVOID being pinned to any specific definition.
    - NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
      Affordable housing is defined by the U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as housing that does not require a household to spend more than 30 percent of its gross monthly income on housing costs. For rental housing, these costs include monthly rent and utility payments; for owner-occupied housing, these costs include mortgage payments and additional expenses associated with homeownership. A household that spends more than 30 percent of its gross monthly income on housing costs is considered “cost-burdened.”
      - 3y ago
diogenes4 3y ago
It would help if there were any consensus on what actually constitutes affordable housing.
- FuriouslyAdrift 3y ago
  Rent/Mortgage under or equal to 28% net income.
  - diogenes4 3y ago
    That's hardly a consensus nor even enough aggregate consensus to serve as a rule of thumb.
- EMM_386 3y ago
  Each state will calculate them differently, for example, New Jersey offers Excel spreadsheets to show exactly how they calculate it. > The calculators below are for use by administrative agents and developers of affordable housing to determine the initial sales prices and rents for affordable units in compliance with the Uniform Housing Affordability Controls (UHAC). https://www.nj.gov/dca/divisions/lps/hss/calculators.html https://www.nj.gov/dca/divisions/lps/hss/calculators.html
  - diogenes4 3y ago
    taps the lack of consensus sign
fifticon 3y ago
I wonder why the Robin Hood issue is never a problem when money is moved in the opposite direction :-)
- Werewolf255 3y ago
  "One day -I- will be Sheriff of Nottingham, so it's in my interest to sell out my neighbors to King John."
- c_crank 3y ago
  Did anyone force all those students to take student loans?
  - voisin 3y ago
    Education has traditionally been a primary method for upward economic mobility. Once student loans became a thing, colleges jacked up tuition to put it out of reach of anyone but the super wealthy unless student loans were used.
    - c_crank 3y ago
      But no one forced those people to take on those loans.
      - voisin 3y ago
        Not explicitly but the choice is “stay in your economic class or invest in the only thing reliably proven to improve your future”.
        c_crank 3y ago
        And those who do not want to deal with the risk of going through school and not getting a better job to pay for the onerous loans can just remain in their economic class.
        HPsquared 3y ago

jmclnx 3y ago

>Most Metro areas do not have enough affordable housing. Not only that, the definition of "affordable housing" is skewed. In the big metro area near me, "affordable housing" means 1500 to 2000 USD per month. That is not affordable to any normal person. To me, affordable rent should be below 1000 USD. You think this homeless crises is bad, wait 30 years and then you will see Cities with large slums like many "third" world countries have. And yes, it is the Gov. job to fix this, but the politicians wants to continue receiving their "bribes" from companies, some of which are buying up rental properties as fast as they become available. Ever see "cash for your house" ? Those properties are probably being bought up for use with AirBNB or being turned into rentals for around 3000 USD.

no_wizard 3y ago
ProPublica did a whole series on one of the larger "Cash for your house" type businesses. It seems they're really trying to extract cheap homes from distressed sellers with pressure tactics[0][1][2][3] [0]: https://www.propublica.org/article/ugly-truth-behind-we-buy-ugly-houses https://www.propublica.org/article/ugly-truth-behind-we-buy-... [1]: https://www.propublica.org/article/behind-the-scenes-of-we-buy-ugly-houses-deal https://www.propublica.org/article/behind-the-scenes-of-we-b... [2]: https://www.propublica.org/article/state-federal-laws-do-little-protect-homeowners-we-buy-ugly-houses-deals https://www.propublica.org/article/state-federal-laws-do-lit... [3]: https://www.propublica.org/article/want-to-sell-home-for-cash-read-this-first https://www.propublica.org/article/want-to-sell-home-for-cas...
- bombcar 3y ago
  The other side of this "scam" is that people are being sold how to "get rich quick" in real estate for $5k seminars (which boil down to "offer people 30% below market value and hope you get people who are dumb/desperate enough to sell").

somewhereoutth 3y ago

Let's take SF as an example. If a significant number of new units were built (somehow without detracting from the character of the city), would it really lower prices much? Likely not - instead prices would dip just enough to make it viable for large numbers of high income people from outside SF to come to the city (which by massing effect may make SF even more desirable, so actually higher prices!) Wealth taxes are not a fairly tale, though of course they are a nightmare for the excessively wealthy! In the UK we used death duties to finish off the aristocracy.

sokoloff 3y ago
If it works temporarily, but gets consumed by induced demand, then do it again. And then again. And then again. This is a good thing. If SF is so great, many more people will be able to go there.
- seanmcdirmid 3y ago
  So you are claiming that if SF becomes as dense as Manhattan, it will be as cheap as Manhattan? Or maybe Hong Kong’s density and housing affordability is the target here? The ideal situation is Tokyo, where a lack of culture in speculating on housing coupled with population decreases leads (going down in the metro area for the last three years) to housing affordability.
  - sokoloff 3y ago
    I'm claiming that the balance of supply and demand affects housing prices. If you increase the supply by enough, that will tip the balance to where the market clearing price will go down.
    - bombcar 3y ago
      The real underlying problem is that you have X million people who want to live in the quaint version of San Francisco. It's literally impossible; the quaint version dies at some point as more and more people are piled in, even if the resulting city is world-class and quite desirable. Just like the entirety of Los Angeles couldn't move to Santa Barbara without Santa Barbara being changed forever. The closest reasonable equivalent we can do is maintain the quaint "old town" and build a "real city" around it where people actually live and work, and the old town remains as a tourist destination, basically. This is the case in much of Europe. The Paris you visit and the Paris people live in are often mixed, but they're noticeably different. Rapid mass transit to city centers can hide the distinction.

jwestbury 3y ago

> Most Metro areas do not have enough affordable housing. There's no such thing as affordable housing[0]. Just housing. You can certainly argue that building a house is too expensive -- and due to NIMBYism, discriminatory policies, and anti-density regulatory environments, this is often true -- but affordability is not an intrinsic value of a building, and the problem is generally that housing stock simply doesn't keep up with demand in places which demand lots of housing (e.g., San Francisco, Seattle, NYC, London, etc.). 0. https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2023/1/3/theres-no-such-thing-as-affordable-housing https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2023/1/3/theres-no-such-...

NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
That's a pithy, contrarian slogan, not a statement of fact. "Affordable Housing" is a term of art with a specific definition, and yes, it really exists, all over these United States. Also, if you want to use it colloquially, then housing is, by definition, affordable for most of the people who live in housing and are not running a spending deficit.
- diogenes4 3y ago
  What is that specific definition? It seems in many cases the term is used to AVOID being pinned to any specific definition.
  - NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
    Affordable housing is defined by the U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as housing that does not require a household to spend more than 30 percent of its gross monthly income on housing costs. For rental housing, these costs include monthly rent and utility payments; for owner-occupied housing, these costs include mortgage payments and additional expenses associated with homeownership. A household that spends more than 30 percent of its gross monthly income on housing costs is considered “cost-burdened.”
    - 3y ago

diogenes4 3y ago

It would help if there were any consensus on what actually constitutes affordable housing.

FuriouslyAdrift 3y ago
Rent/Mortgage under or equal to 28% net income.
- diogenes4 3y ago
  That's hardly a consensus nor even enough aggregate consensus to serve as a rule of thumb.
EMM_386 3y ago
Each state will calculate them differently, for example, New Jersey offers Excel spreadsheets to show exactly how they calculate it. > The calculators below are for use by administrative agents and developers of affordable housing to determine the initial sales prices and rents for affordable units in compliance with the Uniform Housing Affordability Controls (UHAC). https://www.nj.gov/dca/divisions/lps/hss/calculators.html https://www.nj.gov/dca/divisions/lps/hss/calculators.html
- diogenes4 3y ago
  taps the lack of consensus sign

fifticon 3y ago

I wonder why the Robin Hood issue is never a problem when money is moved in the opposite direction :-)

Werewolf255 3y ago
"One day -I- will be Sheriff of Nottingham, so it's in my interest to sell out my neighbors to King John."
c_crank 3y ago
Did anyone force all those students to take student loans?
- voisin 3y ago
  Education has traditionally been a primary method for upward economic mobility. Once student loans became a thing, colleges jacked up tuition to put it out of reach of anyone but the super wealthy unless student loans were used.
  - c_crank 3y ago
    But no one forced those people to take on those loans.
    - voisin 3y ago
      Not explicitly but the choice is “stay in your economic class or invest in the only thing reliably proven to improve your future”.
      - c_crank 3y ago
        And those who do not want to deal with the risk of going through school and not getting a better job to pay for the onerous loans can just remain in their economic class.
      - HPsquared 3y ago