6 ms·
I used to be very YIMBY. Build, build, build. But what I've come to understand is that this just isn't going to help. Do it anyway, but it's just not going to c
by jmyeet 2y ago
I used to be very YIMBY. Build, build, build. But what I've come to understand is that this just isn't going to help. Do it anyway, but it's just not going to correct the problem of unaffordable housing.
The entire real estate industry and our government is designed to make housing prices go up over time. Voters are behind it because it gives the impression of increasing wealth but it's an illusion for most people. If the median price is $200k and you buy a house for $200k and the median price and your house goes up to $600k, you still only have one housing unit's worth of wealth and you need to live somewhere.
All increasing real estate prices does is enrich a tiny minority by stealing from the next generation. And the negative externalities are massive. Housing makes everything more expensive.
If you look at NYC, you can see that a lot of apartments get built but almost all of them are for the ultra-wealthy to park money. You aren't increasing the available housing.
In the 1990s the average house price in London was 70k pounds. Now it's over 700k. Are wages 10x? No, no they are not. The whole thing is a giant Ponzi scheme to keep people in debt so they're compliant little workers.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- AlphaSite 2y agoI mean in the Bay Area where SFH have massively ballooned in price condos have remained steady for a long time. It works. Maybe not everyone gets the SFH but that’s fine and not the point. Everyone can own a home.
- gregwebs 2y agoLuxury apartments prevent gentrification. Unoccupied housing or otherwise housing purely for investment is certainly a problem. If they aren’t renting at least with AirBnB they would actually be better served by holding gold in many cases.
- jeffbee 2y agoIt does help and is helping. Here's an article published this week in Berkeley about how a modest building boom has stabilized and lowered rents in existing buildings, after rents doubled in the 2010s. https://www.berkeleyside.org/2025/05/01/berkeley-housing-rent-prices-data https://www.berkeleyside.org/2025/05/01/berkeley-housing-ren... Note: I developed the data used in the article.
- jmyeet 2y agoIf you look at the trend for all Bay Area cities over a similar period [1], you'll see Berkeley is pretty much in line with the overall trend. Now you can argue that's because of greatly increased development, but I don't think that applies to SF (or SJ) and it doesn't match the Berkeley timeline anyway. [1]: https://www.sfchronicle.com/projects/sf-bay-area-rent-prices/?fromRichie=1 https://www.sfchronicle.com/projects/sf-bay-area-rent-prices...
- jeffbee 2y agoYeah, the specific contribution here is tracking a stable cohort of existing housing, not the entire market, to show the effect of new construction on the price of older housing.
- davidw 2y ago> what I've come to understand is that this just isn't going to help. This is false though. Austin, Texas built a lot of apartments and then rents fell 22%. That's a big win for a lot of people seeing lower prices! NYC is not a place that builds very much in proportion to the population. I think that the claim that "supply and demand do not apply to housing" is an extraordinary one, and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
- jeffbee 2y agoRecently some socialist lackwit on Twitter was railing that YIMBYs only lowered prices from $600k to $500k. This person apparently did not understand that the difference - $20k up front and $700/mo for 30 years - is the margin between affordable and not affordable for tens of millions of ordinary people.
- davidw 2y agoIn case anyone reading thinks otherwise: you can absolutely be a socialist and a YIMBY. Maybe your goal is Vienna style housing. The only thing you need to acknowledge is that cities need 'enough' housing.
- jeffbee 2y agoYeah but there's this entire genre of hammer-and-sickle-in-bio online guy who thinks socialism is about ideals, not the material experience of the proletariat. Those guys think we should outlaw home building until after the revolution.
- davidw 2y agoYeah, I've seen those people. They remind me of this scene https://youtu.be/tx02tY8ABfA?si=JbSiDMTdkHs5LrOk&t=62 https://youtu.be/tx02tY8ABfA?si=JbSiDMTdkHs5LrOk&t=62 They don't want to take that next small step that will help somebody, they want to change everything all at once.
- 2y ago
- Hilift 2y agoCheck out the story on Block 216 in Portland. A well known local developer sunk a lot of his own money into the development of an upscale hotel/residences. The result? The new, finished development is valued at $415 million, however the loan debt is $510 million. And of course it isn't generating any tax revenue for the city, which has about $100 million budget deficit, recently announced cuts in services. San Francisco collected $522 million in real estate transfer property tax in 2022. This year will be less than half that. The inflationary rebound after the pandemic and lower than normal interest rates created an artificial market that otherwise may not have existed. https://www.oregonlive.com/business/2025/04/tower-anchored-by-portland-ritz-carlton-is-85m-underwater-on-construction-loan-lender-says.html https://www.oregonlive.com/business/2025/04/tower-anchored-b... https://www.oregonlive.com/business/2025/04/at-troubled-portland-high-rise-theres-no-money-to-repay-anyone-lender-lawyer-says.html https://www.oregonlive.com/business/2025/04/at-troubled-port... https://www.wweek.com/news/city/2025/05/02/portland-city-leaders-plan-20-cuts-to-internal-services-impact-on-general-fund-deficit-unclear/ https://www.wweek.com/news/city/2025/05/02/portland-city-lea...
- ozgrakkurt 1y agoWhy not make it impossible for any corporation to own any real estate that is used for housing people? Is this such an unimaginable evil thing to do? It is really astounding that people put up with this and not vote on it or demand it