3 ms·
We, in the US, have a housing affordability crisis. Therea re a number of causes for this: 1. Cities are reaching the limit they can sprawl while still effecti
by jmyeet 2y ago
We, in the US, have a housing affordability crisis. Therea re a number of causes for this:
1. Cities are reaching the limit they can sprawl while still effectively being the same city. Atlanta springs to mind;
2. People vote for politicians who restrict supply to increase the value of something they see as an asset rather than something simply to provide shelter; Increasing house prices are simply stealing from the next generation. That's all. Minimum lot sizes, SFH only zoning, bans on MDU/ADUs, etc all exist solely to increase house prices;
3. Politicians only ever tackle the problem from the demand side eg mortgage interest tax deductions, first home owner grants. All this does is increase the prices by the induced demand. It's a wealth transfer to the existing homeowners.
4. Landlords. In an ideal world, they wouldn't exist. This almost happened in the UK and it was surprisingly simple [1]. They are quite literally and figuratively rent-seekers.
The YIMBYs will tell you "build! build! build!". This is overly simplistic. It also depends on what you build. Look at Manhattan that is building ultra-luxury skyscrapers. There is no trickle down effect here. It's simply money laundering and parking capital.
What we need is a healthy supply of quality, affordable housing. We simply won't get that relying on private landlords. The only solution to thisis so-called "social housing". That is, government owned and supplied housing. Vienna is a prime example here where over 60% of the housing is social housing. Americans will tend to immediately rject this as "projects" or "ghettoes" (or, worse, "socialism").
Housing unaffordability is the number one factor leading to houselessness. It's not even close.
Denying people shelter is, quite literally, state violence. It is causing direct and immediate harm for the sake of wealth accumulation by a few.
So where does rent control fit in all this? It can be a short-term aid at stabilizing prices but it is not a long-term solution. It tends to make it impossible for people to move. Landlords will resort to unethical or even illegal tactics to force out tenants so they can relist at market rates. Or they'll leave units vacant (IIRC there are 100K+ purposefully vacant units in Mnahattan).
Pretty much our entire society is designed to extract wealth from the poorest through rent, student debt, housing debt, medical debt, vehicle debt and maintenance (because in 99% of the US you cannot exist without a car).
Billionaires spend big to block public transit [2]. Why do you think that is?
[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2024/mar/19/end-of-landlords-surprisingly-simple-solution-to-uk-housing-crisis https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2024/mar/19/end-of-...
[2]: https://archive.is/UFujh https://archive.is/UFujh
- engineer_22 2y agoOn one hand you blame government red tape for preventing housing development. On the other hand you propose the government should manage housing construction and administration. It's strange to be both pro- and anti-government intervention. Maybe you are saying local govts are stifling new housing starts, while state/federal govt should step in?
- bachmeier 2y ago> It's strange to be both pro- and anti-government intervention. It's strange to claim you either have to support or oppose all types of government intervention. There is nothing unreasonable about supporting what you view as good types of intervention while opposing what you view as bad types of intervention.
- engineer_22 2y agoI wasn't trying to insult parent, just observed some cognitive dissonance
- jmyeet 2y agoThat commenter is completely correct: you can be for one policy and against another. It's not cognitive dissonance because I'm for or against certain policies and outcomes. This isn't a team sport. The government isn't the Dallas Cowboys. Making housing unaffordable = bad. Making healthcare accessible and affordable = good. Why on earth would you think yo uhad to support the government either 0% or 100% and nothing in between? It reads like an attempt at hypocrisy baiting because you didn't like what I had to say, not that anything was actually wrong with it. I could be reading that wrong but Ithat's how it reads.
- engineer_22 2y agoYou're off the scent, but I wish you well
- deleted 2y ago