2 ms·

Well, history has not shown that. There are countless situations where large houses have been surrounded by legions of the working poor unable to afford living

Well, history has not shown that. There are countless situations where large houses have been surrounded by legions of the working poor unable to afford living spaces. Or where vacation homes sit empty, owned by people living far away, while cities struggle to find local accommodation for working people.

hedora 3y ago
Neither of those issues have anything to do with housing supply, and they're either be unaffected or exacerbated by affordable housing mandates. The one large house + not enough houses problem is due to income inequality. Making houses scarce increases the price of houses for everyone, so it exacerbates income inequality (it is hard to increase your income and educate your kids while living in a tent). Worse, most affordable housing projects that are currently being proposed deed-restrict the housing (otherwise, unless the initial purchaser is an idiot, they'd immediately sell at a large profit). That prevents poor people from profiting off of the appreciation of property in their neighborhood that and therefore increases long-term income inequality. You also get situations where the low income housing owner can't afford to use local amenities, or maintain their house (which they bought for far less than the cost of initial construction). The second issue (hoarding of vacant houses) can be solved with a vacancy tax. History supports both those arguments. Can you name an example of a city where supply has exceeded demand (measured in months of housing inventory on the market) for an extended period of time (multiple years, so longer than the 2008 crisis), and that also has a housing affordability and homeless crisis? Similarly, can you cite an example of a market where housing has been freely built and sold at a profit over the long term, and that also has a housing supply problem?

hedora 3y ago

Neither of those issues have anything to do with housing supply, and they're either be unaffected or exacerbated by affordable housing mandates. The one large house + not enough houses problem is due to income inequality. Making houses scarce increases the price of houses for everyone, so it exacerbates income inequality (it is hard to increase your income and educate your kids while living in a tent). Worse, most affordable housing projects that are currently being proposed deed-restrict the housing (otherwise, unless the initial purchaser is an idiot, they'd immediately sell at a large profit). That prevents poor people from profiting off of the appreciation of property in their neighborhood that and therefore increases long-term income inequality. You also get situations where the low income housing owner can't afford to use local amenities, or maintain their house (which they bought for far less than the cost of initial construction). The second issue (hoarding of vacant houses) can be solved with a vacancy tax. History supports both those arguments. Can you name an example of a city where supply has exceeded demand (measured in months of housing inventory on the market) for an extended period of time (multiple years, so longer than the 2008 crisis), and that also has a housing affordability and homeless crisis? Similarly, can you cite an example of a market where housing has been freely built and sold at a profit over the long term, and that also has a housing supply problem?