5 ms·

The OECD link you’ve provided shows the complete opposite of your point. The UK, Ireland, Canada, and New Zealand are at the bottom of % vacant dwellings indic

The OECD link you’ve provided shows the complete opposite of your point. The UK, Ireland, Canada, and New Zealand are at the bottom of % vacant dwellings indicating the opposite of underutilization.

tmnvix 2y ago
It's the difference between 2011 and 2022 that I was highlighting. Unfortunately the document doesn't show changes in vacancy rate.
- aegypti 2y ago
  The difference showing that Ireland, Canada, New Zealand, and the US had either the same, or more dwellings per thousand inhabitants in 2011 than 2022? I don’t know if I’m just misunderstanding your point, or misreading the material, but that is also not an example of underutilization.
  - tmnvix 2y ago
    My point is that the relatively static proportion of people to dwellings in those countries over that period suggests that a supply shortage is not sufficient to explain the accommodation crisis. What I am suggesting is that incentives to invest in property have led to an increase in the number of properties that are not being used as a primary residence (i.e. are underutilised) and that that is the most significant factor causing the shortage of available homes.
    - lazyasciiart 2y ago
      I think you’d want to look at household size - 4 five person households need fewer houses than 10 two person households, even though the population is the same.
      - tmnvix 2y ago
        That's a good point and I have done that in the past (for NZ). Household size has remained steady over roughly the same period (decade up to 2018 where census data is available). This doesn't account for a possible significant change in household size distribution of course (e.g. the possibility of many more elderly living alone while young people increasingly live in shared housing).
    - aegypti 2y ago
      I see now through a US & REIT centric bias, I think. Given a market like NZ’s size, growth/prices, and attractiveness I can see demand like speculation, STRs, and 2nd homes possibly affecting utilization more than supply. Given US markets that are larger, cheaper, and less attractive where investment properties fueled on cheap credit were rented out or to a much smaller degree flipped, it’s truly, significantly more difficult to imagine vs simple lack of supply (especially given historically low US rental & homeowner vacancy rates).
ivan_gammel 2y ago
Iirc, 20% of all bedrooms in UK are spare bedrooms in houses that are too big for their owners. This is indeed underutilization.
- Macha 2y ago
  As someone with spare bedrooms, this itself is a problem of undersupply. If you can't be sure of being able to trade up when you need to (e.g. after starting a family) because house prices are up 100% in 10 years, then you're going to want to buy a house for all possible future needs, rather than current needs. Add to that, things that might be desirable for other reasons, like garden space, rooms for use as offices, large kitchens, etc. all tend to scale with bedroom count too.
  - ivan_gammel 2y ago
    House ownership is higher among boomers, who are not going to have children anyway. Maybe for some people concern for future prices is a good reason, but certainly it is not for everyone. If there’s spare capacity enough for 20% more people and population growth forecast by 2050 is just one third of that, you cannot really talk about undersupply, when there’s enough accommodation to cover even future demand.
    - Macha 2y ago
      This assumes a level of fungibility that's just not there. Apart from the discussions elsewhere in this thread about why spare bedrooms might not be suitable to rent, even for those that are, splitting a family of 4 across 4 spare bedrooms in 4 different properties is suboptimal at best and legally child neglect at worst. Equally, houses in Cornwall are of little use when the jobs are in London.
  - gravescale 2y ago
    Also trading up comes with stamp duty, which is a damper on moving house unless you absolutely have to. Not only is your new house bigger and more expensive then anything you've ever bought before with that extra bedroom, plus the large expenses and hassle of moving in general, it's likely another £10k or more in stamp duty unless your new 3-bed is somewhere pretty cheap in the country. You don't get the first time buyer discount either, as you already have a house. It's basically a tax that punishes labour mobility and not oversizing property. Of course, you have to pay to heat and maintain that bigger house and pay higher council tax on it, so your saved stamp duty will probably be used after a few years, so in an ultra-rational way, it comes out in the wash, but it certainly doesn't feel like it at the time.
roenxi 2y ago
And they have below-expected dwellings per 1,000 residents. The "Total number of dwellings per thousand inhabitants, 2022 and 2011" suggests there are potential supply problems.

tmnvix 2y ago

It's the difference between 2011 and 2022 that I was highlighting. Unfortunately the document doesn't show changes in vacancy rate.

aegypti 2y ago
The difference showing that Ireland, Canada, New Zealand, and the US had either the same, or more dwellings per thousand inhabitants in 2011 than 2022? I don’t know if I’m just misunderstanding your point, or misreading the material, but that is also not an example of underutilization.
- tmnvix 2y ago
  My point is that the relatively static proportion of people to dwellings in those countries over that period suggests that a supply shortage is not sufficient to explain the accommodation crisis. What I am suggesting is that incentives to invest in property have led to an increase in the number of properties that are not being used as a primary residence (i.e. are underutilised) and that that is the most significant factor causing the shortage of available homes.
  - lazyasciiart 2y ago
    I think you’d want to look at household size - 4 five person households need fewer houses than 10 two person households, even though the population is the same.
    - tmnvix 2y ago
      That's a good point and I have done that in the past (for NZ). Household size has remained steady over roughly the same period (decade up to 2018 where census data is available). This doesn't account for a possible significant change in household size distribution of course (e.g. the possibility of many more elderly living alone while young people increasingly live in shared housing).
  - aegypti 2y ago
    I see now through a US & REIT centric bias, I think. Given a market like NZ’s size, growth/prices, and attractiveness I can see demand like speculation, STRs, and 2nd homes possibly affecting utilization more than supply. Given US markets that are larger, cheaper, and less attractive where investment properties fueled on cheap credit were rented out or to a much smaller degree flipped, it’s truly, significantly more difficult to imagine vs simple lack of supply (especially given historically low US rental & homeowner vacancy rates).

ivan_gammel 2y ago

Iirc, 20% of all bedrooms in UK are spare bedrooms in houses that are too big for their owners. This is indeed underutilization.

Macha 2y ago
As someone with spare bedrooms, this itself is a problem of undersupply. If you can't be sure of being able to trade up when you need to (e.g. after starting a family) because house prices are up 100% in 10 years, then you're going to want to buy a house for all possible future needs, rather than current needs. Add to that, things that might be desirable for other reasons, like garden space, rooms for use as offices, large kitchens, etc. all tend to scale with bedroom count too.
- ivan_gammel 2y ago
  House ownership is higher among boomers, who are not going to have children anyway. Maybe for some people concern for future prices is a good reason, but certainly it is not for everyone. If there’s spare capacity enough for 20% more people and population growth forecast by 2050 is just one third of that, you cannot really talk about undersupply, when there’s enough accommodation to cover even future demand.
  - Macha 2y ago
    This assumes a level of fungibility that's just not there. Apart from the discussions elsewhere in this thread about why spare bedrooms might not be suitable to rent, even for those that are, splitting a family of 4 across 4 spare bedrooms in 4 different properties is suboptimal at best and legally child neglect at worst. Equally, houses in Cornwall are of little use when the jobs are in London.
- gravescale 2y ago
  Also trading up comes with stamp duty, which is a damper on moving house unless you absolutely have to. Not only is your new house bigger and more expensive then anything you've ever bought before with that extra bedroom, plus the large expenses and hassle of moving in general, it's likely another £10k or more in stamp duty unless your new 3-bed is somewhere pretty cheap in the country. You don't get the first time buyer discount either, as you already have a house. It's basically a tax that punishes labour mobility and not oversizing property. Of course, you have to pay to heat and maintain that bigger house and pay higher council tax on it, so your saved stamp duty will probably be used after a few years, so in an ultra-rational way, it comes out in the wash, but it certainly doesn't feel like it at the time.

roenxi 2y ago

And they have below-expected dwellings per 1,000 residents. The "Total number of dwellings per thousand inhabitants, 2022 and 2011" suggests there are potential supply problems.