4 ms·

Price controls work to ensure scarcity. Flooding the market with new construction (at any price level, though ideally at all sizes and quality of housing) will

Price controls work to ensure scarcity. Flooding the market with new construction (at any price level, though ideally at all sizes and quality of housing) will do more to sustainably lower prices while leaving a functioning market.

doctorpangloss 1y ago
a dreary part of this conversation is, nobody wants to play the game, what does random HN user sokoloff mean by the words "functioning market," "sustainably," "flooding", "ideally", "quality", and even "scarcity"? I don't know what you are saying, because you are leaning so deeply on an internal glossary known only to you, made worse by hijacking real words that everyone can look up in a dictionary.
- sugarplant 1y ago
  how high were you when you made this post?
- jstimpfle 1y ago
  Funny that GP whas one of the comments that made immediate intuitive sense to me. By the simple principle of demand / supply ~ price, price controls (in a time of high prices, which is because of scarcity), should inhibit creation of more supply. Leaving prices to their natural forces should allow creation of more supply, which, regardless of the price level, should relax the market and lead to lower prices. While price controls might keep the supply affordable to a larger share of the population, that doesn't help the fact that there isn't enough supply, so instead of money, other mechanisms influence who gets to buy the goods. This could be: Who is most willing to invest an unhealthy amount of time and energy, who is eligible to maybe acquire state funding, or simply who is the lucky one. Is any of this better than letting money decide? I tend to think no and think it would be better to have a functioning market with reasonable prices.
- sokoloff 1y ago
  ?? I'm using those six quoted terms to have a meaning the same as what Google returns as the first definition for five and the second for one (which I think is obvious to all readers from context): "functioning market" - A functioning market, in economic terms, is a system where buyers and sellers can freely interact to exchange goods and services, with prices determined by the forces of supply and demand, and where information is readily available. A well-functioning market is characterized by competition, efficient resource allocation, and the absence of significant barriers to entry and exit. "sustainably" - 1. in a way that can be maintained at a certain rate or level. "flooding" - 2. arrive in overwhelming amounts or quantities. I posit that no one was confused and thought I meant "1. the covering or submerging of normally dry land with a large amount of water." "ideally" - 1. preferably; in an ideal world. "quality" - 1. the standard of something as measured against other things of a similar kind; the degree of excellence of something. "scarcity" - 1. the state of being scarce or in short supply; shortage.

doctorpangloss 1y ago

a dreary part of this conversation is, nobody wants to play the game, what does random HN user sokoloff mean by the words "functioning market," "sustainably," "flooding", "ideally", "quality", and even "scarcity"? I don't know what you are saying, because you are leaning so deeply on an internal glossary known only to you, made worse by hijacking real words that everyone can look up in a dictionary.

sugarplant 1y ago
how high were you when you made this post?
jstimpfle 1y ago
Funny that GP whas one of the comments that made immediate intuitive sense to me. By the simple principle of demand / supply ~ price, price controls (in a time of high prices, which is because of scarcity), should inhibit creation of more supply. Leaving prices to their natural forces should allow creation of more supply, which, regardless of the price level, should relax the market and lead to lower prices. While price controls might keep the supply affordable to a larger share of the population, that doesn't help the fact that there isn't enough supply, so instead of money, other mechanisms influence who gets to buy the goods. This could be: Who is most willing to invest an unhealthy amount of time and energy, who is eligible to maybe acquire state funding, or simply who is the lucky one. Is any of this better than letting money decide? I tend to think no and think it would be better to have a functioning market with reasonable prices.
sokoloff 1y ago
?? I'm using those six quoted terms to have a meaning the same as what Google returns as the first definition for five and the second for one (which I think is obvious to all readers from context): "functioning market" - A functioning market, in economic terms, is a system where buyers and sellers can freely interact to exchange goods and services, with prices determined by the forces of supply and demand, and where information is readily available. A well-functioning market is characterized by competition, efficient resource allocation, and the absence of significant barriers to entry and exit. "sustainably" - 1. in a way that can be maintained at a certain rate or level. "flooding" - 2. arrive in overwhelming amounts or quantities. I posit that no one was confused and thought I meant "1. the covering or submerging of normally dry land with a large amount of water." "ideally" - 1. preferably; in an ideal world. "quality" - 1. the standard of something as measured against other things of a similar kind; the degree of excellence of something. "scarcity" - 1. the state of being scarce or in short supply; shortage.