5 ms·

The problem is that housing and health insurance are too expensive. Tech isn’t responsible for either of those problems.

by sjducb 1y ago

kjkjadksj 1y ago
In a way it is. Why are housing costs so high in Redmond, WA? The result of an influx of high income tech workers to the local housing market and the resulting shift of prices such as to eventually dilute the utility of that high salary to begin with. People in the area without a hook on that whale are of course left high and dry.
- skeaker 1y ago
  Citation needed, my understanding was that housing prices are being driven up by real estate owners/agencies buying tons of property to either rent at extortionary prices or sit on until they sell for a higher price to the next sucker. Also stuff like the RealPage scandal where they simply illegally collude: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41330007 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41330007 I think the idea of a law that only allows a limited number of owned properties per person and requires them to actually be using those properties would be interesting to alleviate this.
  - 0xffff2 1y ago
    Housing prices are being driven up by the fact that we don't build enough housing. That should be the end of the discussion. What you describe is just a symptom of not having enough housing. If we just built more housing then there wouldn't be any business angle for the corporations buying up housing.
    - skeaker 1y ago
      The obscenely rich entities that buy up tons of property without actually using it do so because they only stand to gain even more money on it later. Making more housing would help in the long term for sure, but these entities would still buy up most of it as it becomes available. Remember that as long as they hold the vast majority, they essentially have a captive audience and can set whatever outlandish prices they want (especially when they collude as they have done). Something to restrict the number of unused properties a person can own would still be beneficial either way. This also goes without mentioning the restrictions on "just" building new housing (land, time, and space, particularly space located near job sites).
    - DontchaKnowit 1y ago
      Well, why dont we build more housing?
      - tuatoru 1y ago
        Exactly. Who has the political connections to get develkopment policy tilted their way?
- uses 1y ago
  No... the reason housing prices are high and rising is that not enough housing is getting build in the places people want to live. The main reason for that is that the people who already live in those places can block construction of new housing. That, and zoning.
  - _DeadFred_ 1y ago
    Housing prices in so many places are high because Californians, used to spending crazy high prices for property in tech spheres (or able to sell their property for crazy high prices because of the tech spheres) moved to other locations and caused property values in those areas to go up. Why is Hacker News trying to rewrite this?
    - pj_mukh 1y ago
      No one's trying to rewrite anything. "Californians, used to spending crazy high prices for property" Please dig into why that statement is true and re-read your parent statement. Your analysis can't just abruptly stop there. It all goes back to housing supply.
      - _DeadFred_ 1y ago
        It all goes back to tech. Tech jobs grow in the area and pay significantly higher than previous jobs. Those jobs increase people moving to the area by dramatic, non-traditional numbers outpacing how the area previously approached housing, and give the people much more buying power than the current residents, pushing those people (including me) out. The housing supply problem goes back to... tech. No community is prepared for a gold rush to happen, nor has housing plans in place to accommodate it. Nor do they normally want to accommodate it. So it turns into a big of a mess. Please dig into why my analysis is correct. I lived through it. I had to leave friends and family. It negatively impacted mine and almost every friends life negatively (as in had to more away and start a new life).
        pj_mukh 1y ago
BriggyDwiggs42 1y ago
Parent didn’t claim tech was responsible for every problem? Housing prices are likely an inequality issue; as a greater portion of money in the economy is held by rich people, more money is invested and less is spent on goods/services, hence a scarce asset like land sees an increase in value.
_DeadFred_ 1y ago
I mean home prices went up insane in California due to tech. Many people cashed out and bought homes in cheaper locations...driving up the housing prices there beyond what locals could afford. How did Hacker News already forget these things?
grafmax 1y ago
I don’t say it was responsible. My argument is against Altman’s picture of progress. He argues that improvements in science and technology drive progress. My argument is that technology brings both positive and negative changes, and the degree to which the working class sees a net benefit largely depends on its ability to struggle against the business class.

The problem is that housing and health insurance are too expensive. Tech isn’t responsible for either of those problems.

by sjducb 1y ago

The problem is that housing and health insurance are too expensive. Tech isn’t responsible for either of those problems.

kjkjadksj 1y ago

In a way it is. Why are housing costs so high in Redmond, WA? The result of an influx of high income tech workers to the local housing market and the resulting shift of prices such as to eventually dilute the utility of that high salary to begin with. People in the area without a hook on that whale are of course left high and dry.

skeaker 1y ago
Citation needed, my understanding was that housing prices are being driven up by real estate owners/agencies buying tons of property to either rent at extortionary prices or sit on until they sell for a higher price to the next sucker. Also stuff like the RealPage scandal where they simply illegally collude: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41330007 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41330007 I think the idea of a law that only allows a limited number of owned properties per person and requires them to actually be using those properties would be interesting to alleviate this.
- 0xffff2 1y ago
  Housing prices are being driven up by the fact that we don't build enough housing. That should be the end of the discussion. What you describe is just a symptom of not having enough housing. If we just built more housing then there wouldn't be any business angle for the corporations buying up housing.
  - skeaker 1y ago
    The obscenely rich entities that buy up tons of property without actually using it do so because they only stand to gain even more money on it later. Making more housing would help in the long term for sure, but these entities would still buy up most of it as it becomes available. Remember that as long as they hold the vast majority, they essentially have a captive audience and can set whatever outlandish prices they want (especially when they collude as they have done). Something to restrict the number of unused properties a person can own would still be beneficial either way. This also goes without mentioning the restrictions on "just" building new housing (land, time, and space, particularly space located near job sites).
  - DontchaKnowit 1y ago
    Well, why dont we build more housing?
    - tuatoru 1y ago
      Exactly. Who has the political connections to get develkopment policy tilted their way?
uses 1y ago
No... the reason housing prices are high and rising is that not enough housing is getting build in the places people want to live. The main reason for that is that the people who already live in those places can block construction of new housing. That, and zoning.
- _DeadFred_ 1y ago
  Housing prices in so many places are high because Californians, used to spending crazy high prices for property in tech spheres (or able to sell their property for crazy high prices because of the tech spheres) moved to other locations and caused property values in those areas to go up. Why is Hacker News trying to rewrite this?
  - pj_mukh 1y ago
    No one's trying to rewrite anything. "Californians, used to spending crazy high prices for property" Please dig into why that statement is true and re-read your parent statement. Your analysis can't just abruptly stop there. It all goes back to housing supply.
    - _DeadFred_ 1y ago
      It all goes back to tech. Tech jobs grow in the area and pay significantly higher than previous jobs. Those jobs increase people moving to the area by dramatic, non-traditional numbers outpacing how the area previously approached housing, and give the people much more buying power than the current residents, pushing those people (including me) out. The housing supply problem goes back to... tech. No community is prepared for a gold rush to happen, nor has housing plans in place to accommodate it. Nor do they normally want to accommodate it. So it turns into a big of a mess. Please dig into why my analysis is correct. I lived through it. I had to leave friends and family. It negatively impacted mine and almost every friends life negatively (as in had to more away and start a new life).
      - pj_mukh 1y ago

BriggyDwiggs42 1y ago

Parent didn’t claim tech was responsible for every problem? Housing prices are likely an inequality issue; as a greater portion of money in the economy is held by rich people, more money is invested and less is spent on goods/services, hence a scarce asset like land sees an increase in value.

_DeadFred_ 1y ago

I mean home prices went up insane in California due to tech. Many people cashed out and bought homes in cheaper locations...driving up the housing prices there beyond what locals could afford. How did Hacker News already forget these things?

grafmax 1y ago

I don’t say it was responsible. My argument is against Altman’s picture of progress. He argues that improvements in science and technology drive progress. My argument is that technology brings both positive and negative changes, and the degree to which the working class sees a net benefit largely depends on its ability to struggle against the business class.