7 ms·
We don't need quantitative models if we want the rock to fall. It might be nice to have them, but one of the great things about market economies is that we don'
by epistasis 6mo ago
We don't need quantitative models if we want the rock to fall. It might be nice to have them, but one of the great things about market economies is that we don't micromanage according to overly complex estimates, and get better results.
Zoning and homeowners are holding on to the rock with a death grip, all while saying "the rock won't fall if we let go, that's fake science, it's far more nuanced you see" as they lie through their teeth to make big profits and immiserate those who don't own land.
- abdullahkhalids 6mo agoThe quantitative model will tell you whether building housing of type A of quantity B results in more of a decrease in rent than building housing of type C of quantity D. Then you choose the policy that results in the desired decrease in rent. Otherwise, you risk wasting time in pursuing a policy that only results in a 0.1% decrease.
- epistasis 6mo agoYou do have a strong point, in that homeowners are eager to approve plans that allow for ADUs but disallow anything slightly larger. Homeowners already have housing, don't often need more of it, and like having complete control so they approve plans that allow ADUS with the knowledge that it won't account for any significant new housing, and new housing is directly against homeowners' financial interests. But in reality, the political choice of "let's build A, or B, or C" doesn't exist to maximize the effect of housing. People overly focus on highly regulating to a specific type of housing to prevent anything from getting built. Let people decide for their own what type of housing they want, and all of a sudden we'd have enough of it. That's the biggest fear of landlords and homeowners.