7 ms·

After WW2 all European countries had massive housing shortages. It was not capitalism that solved it but heavy government involvement. In a span a few decades m

After WW2 all European countries had massive housing shortages. It was not capitalism that solved it but heavy government involvement. In a span a few decades millions of people were re-housed. The free market is remarkably terrible at pumping out houses fast.

ChickeNES 7d ago
Yet in the US, it was developers following the Levittown model that resulted in tons and tons of single family homes, so I fail to see how the free market is terrible at "pumping out houses fast"?
- gambiting 7d ago
  Well, think whether the market conditions that lead to it could be recreated today, and then you'll see how the free market fails to deliver a lot of housing fast. Developers have long ago realized it's better for them to pump out fewer houses with more profit margin slower, than lots of houses with little profit margins. They get a planning permission on a giant site for a 1000 houses but only build 50 a year to not disrupt the high prices they can charge for each unit. That's free market for you right now.
  - ChickeNES 7d ago
    This is such a fundamental misunderstanding of how the housing market works, and totally ignores apartments/midrises/highrises. The problem with housing in the US lies with overregulation (mostly in the form of zoning). I know this well, as someone who has attended numerous planning meetings in Chicago, I have seen many buildings reduced in unit count solely due to NIMBYs (mostly retired people, as these meetings are often during the day or the immediately 5-7pm time when many people are still commuting home from work).
    - gambiting 7d ago
      No idea about the US, but that is indeed how it happens on this side of the pond - developers rarely build mid or high rises, it's all single family homes.
    - stockresearcher 7d ago
      As far as big cities go, Chicago is a very easy city to build in. However, as you surely know, it follows an informal system called Aldermanic Prerogative, which gives a lot of influence to the alderman in charge of each ward. If the NIMBYs in your local area have excessive sway, it’s because your local alderman depends on them. In my old neighborhood, if a developer wanted to build a high rise with 300 apartments, they’d make a proposal for 350 apartments, have a few public meetings, let people yell at them for a couple hours, and make a “concession” of reducing the project to 300 apartments. Then everyone goes home happy. Everyone knew that was the game, except perhaps a few obtuse NIMBYs that thought they were accomplishing something. In the mile or two south of Roosevelt Rd, there are 5000-10000 permitted apartments/condos, just waiting for some developer to get a loan and pull permits to start construction. No public meetings needed. They could start building next week.
- mschild 7d ago
  The market is not terrible pumping out houses fast, but the current market conditions mean that said houses/apartments are not affordable for most people. The average rent in Berlin (and other German cities) is not very high but that's because a lot of flats still run on a very old contract. If you're moving to Berlin, finding an apartment is incredibly difficult, even if you're willing to spend a lot of money. My grandmother lives by herself in a 90sqm flat in a really nice area and pays 400 Euros a month. In the last 10 years she tried to find a smaller flat (30-40 sqm) for herself but the cheapest she could find was 750. So she stays where she is and just doesn't use 2 of the rooms she has except for storage. In the meantime, a friend of mine moved to Berlin and couldn't find a decent 60sqm flat for less than 1400 Euros. The only way to get those affordable rents is either knowing someone who is moving out or getting super lucky by finding and getting it through a public ad. Massenbesichtigung (mass viewings) are not uncommon. The agent will publish a public timeslot and literally hundreds of people lined around the block will show up to view a single flat.
  - tirant 7d ago
    The main reason new housing is extremely expensive has to do with regulations themselves. It costs a lot of money to build a new apartment building because land where you are allowed to build is regulated by the State. Also the State requires many regulations that increase unnecessarily the costs, and most of all in the name of the ideology. For example, housing standards of Japan and the US, which are way cheaper and still serve two of the richest countries in the world, would never be allowed in Germany. That makes housing unaffordable and drives people into poverty.
    - Timon3 7d ago
      Could you give some specific examples of ideologically-motivated standards that Japan and the US don't fulfill?
andsoitis 7d ago
Then the govt. should build new homes; I'm not sure that taking homes from people ("nationalize") creates supply.
- usernametaken29 7d ago
  But it does. There’s immense amount of houses that are unused because they’re part of speculation, and it’s easier to leave them empty than to deal with tenants and their rights. This is an extremely well documented, systemic issue in large European metropolis and especially in Berlin. Forcing existing property to be used immediately adds supply, and it also lowers prices. Exactly the things large property developers do not want. But I don’t give a shit what they want. I want affordable rent.
  - inglor_cz 7d ago
    immense amount of houses that are unused because they’re part of speculation, ... This is an extremely well documented, systemic issue in large European metropolis and especially in Berlin. Source? Deutschlandatlas says that Berlin has whole 2 percent of empty apartments for all reasons, which is less then half of German average [0] Some of those apartments are being remodeled, some are just in the period where the previous tenant moved out and the next moved in. There are 16 thousand long-term empty apartments, which looks like a huge number, but it is only 0.8 percent of the total. [1] Even if those 16 thousand apartments could be all put to market (some have legal barriers, like being part of a complicated litigation), that easing would not last even for a single mayor's tenure. Last year alone, Berlin grew up by 17 thousand people. [2] It was not an extraordinary year. ALL that money that the Linke wants to sink into old housing should be spent to build new one, just to accomodate the arrivals. [0] https://www.deutschlandatlas.bund.de/DE/Karten/Wie-wir-wohnen/046-Wohnungsleerstand.html https://www.deutschlandatlas.bund.de/DE/Karten/Wie-wir-wohne... [1] https://www.berlin.de/sen/wohnen/rechtliches/zweckentfremdungsverbot/ https://www.berlin.de/sen/wohnen/rechtliches/zweckentfremdun... [2] https://www.statistik-berlin-brandenburg.de/106-2025/ https://www.statistik-berlin-brandenburg.de/106-2025/
    - 7d ago
tmnvix 7d ago
Same story in NZ.
dash2 7d ago
Hmm, I got curious and read Wikipedia: > Levittowns are six large suburban housing developments, three of which are actually named "Levittown." They were created in the United States (including one in Puerto Rico) by William J. Levitt and his company Levitt & Sons. Built after World War II for returning white veterans and their new families, the communities offered attractive alternatives to cramped central city locations and apartments. The Veterans Administration and the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) guaranteed builders that qualified veterans could buy housing for a fraction of rental costs. Under Levitt & Sons, Levittown housing would maintain racial covenants that excluded non-White would-be buyers. Italics added. Seems the government was somewhat involved in the US too. Of course, now the reason "the free market is terrible at pumping out houses" is government regulation too....
bluegatty 7d ago
Germany doe not have a housing shortage problem, it's another set of problems. (Edit: these are economic problems, productivity, bureaucracy, and all sorts of other things showing up as housing problems) They will have to wail until after WW3 because Russia is openly threatening action, European governments are trying to prepare their citizens, German populists want to return to 'normal relations' with Russia, which means 'use our money to invade and kill everyone to the East of us, just not us'. Germany and Europe is in for a very rough ride. Were it not for the war situation, then we could say this is 'healthy political turmoil' - but this is at a time when outside parties will take advantage of European disunity.
- cedilla 7d ago
  Berlin has a massive shortage. Vacancy rates are at about 1.5%. Functioning housing markets are at about 3%.
  - bluegatty 7d ago
    It's wrong to suggest that vacancy rates are are necessarily sign of housing dysfunction. Areas that are attractive to live always have low vacancy rates, because there's a reason that people want to live there. The assumption that 'as many people ought to be able to live in a neighbourhood as should want to live there' - implied by the 'vacancy rate' issue just means 'every attractive area turns into Hong Kong'. While there can be very good reason for more building as well - socialized housing is almost never the answer to that. It has a role in some situations, but generally not on the aggregate like that. Usually this will have to do with permits, regulation - and frankly workers. Nobody wants to do the kind of labour necessary to build homes, and it's extremely hard to find workers to do that kind of work, which to anyone paying the least bit of attention should be a pretty big paradox. 'City overflowing with people who want homes to live don't want to make homes in which to live' Probably there's a lot of bureaucracy to clean out and that's a good place to start.
GHanku 7d ago
[dead]

ChickeNES 7d ago

Yet in the US, it was developers following the Levittown model that resulted in tons and tons of single family homes, so I fail to see how the free market is terrible at "pumping out houses fast"?

gambiting 7d ago
Well, think whether the market conditions that lead to it could be recreated today, and then you'll see how the free market fails to deliver a lot of housing fast. Developers have long ago realized it's better for them to pump out fewer houses with more profit margin slower, than lots of houses with little profit margins. They get a planning permission on a giant site for a 1000 houses but only build 50 a year to not disrupt the high prices they can charge for each unit. That's free market for you right now.
- ChickeNES 7d ago
  This is such a fundamental misunderstanding of how the housing market works, and totally ignores apartments/midrises/highrises. The problem with housing in the US lies with overregulation (mostly in the form of zoning). I know this well, as someone who has attended numerous planning meetings in Chicago, I have seen many buildings reduced in unit count solely due to NIMBYs (mostly retired people, as these meetings are often during the day or the immediately 5-7pm time when many people are still commuting home from work).
  - gambiting 7d ago
    No idea about the US, but that is indeed how it happens on this side of the pond - developers rarely build mid or high rises, it's all single family homes.
  - stockresearcher 7d ago
    As far as big cities go, Chicago is a very easy city to build in. However, as you surely know, it follows an informal system called Aldermanic Prerogative, which gives a lot of influence to the alderman in charge of each ward. If the NIMBYs in your local area have excessive sway, it’s because your local alderman depends on them. In my old neighborhood, if a developer wanted to build a high rise with 300 apartments, they’d make a proposal for 350 apartments, have a few public meetings, let people yell at them for a couple hours, and make a “concession” of reducing the project to 300 apartments. Then everyone goes home happy. Everyone knew that was the game, except perhaps a few obtuse NIMBYs that thought they were accomplishing something. In the mile or two south of Roosevelt Rd, there are 5000-10000 permitted apartments/condos, just waiting for some developer to get a loan and pull permits to start construction. No public meetings needed. They could start building next week.
mschild 7d ago
The market is not terrible pumping out houses fast, but the current market conditions mean that said houses/apartments are not affordable for most people. The average rent in Berlin (and other German cities) is not very high but that's because a lot of flats still run on a very old contract. If you're moving to Berlin, finding an apartment is incredibly difficult, even if you're willing to spend a lot of money. My grandmother lives by herself in a 90sqm flat in a really nice area and pays 400 Euros a month. In the last 10 years she tried to find a smaller flat (30-40 sqm) for herself but the cheapest she could find was 750. So she stays where she is and just doesn't use 2 of the rooms she has except for storage. In the meantime, a friend of mine moved to Berlin and couldn't find a decent 60sqm flat for less than 1400 Euros. The only way to get those affordable rents is either knowing someone who is moving out or getting super lucky by finding and getting it through a public ad. Massenbesichtigung (mass viewings) are not uncommon. The agent will publish a public timeslot and literally hundreds of people lined around the block will show up to view a single flat.
- tirant 7d ago
  The main reason new housing is extremely expensive has to do with regulations themselves. It costs a lot of money to build a new apartment building because land where you are allowed to build is regulated by the State. Also the State requires many regulations that increase unnecessarily the costs, and most of all in the name of the ideology. For example, housing standards of Japan and the US, which are way cheaper and still serve two of the richest countries in the world, would never be allowed in Germany. That makes housing unaffordable and drives people into poverty.
  - Timon3 7d ago
    Could you give some specific examples of ideologically-motivated standards that Japan and the US don't fulfill?

andsoitis 7d ago

Then the govt. should build new homes; I'm not sure that taking homes from people ("nationalize") creates supply.

usernametaken29 7d ago
But it does. There’s immense amount of houses that are unused because they’re part of speculation, and it’s easier to leave them empty than to deal with tenants and their rights. This is an extremely well documented, systemic issue in large European metropolis and especially in Berlin. Forcing existing property to be used immediately adds supply, and it also lowers prices. Exactly the things large property developers do not want. But I don’t give a shit what they want. I want affordable rent.
- inglor_cz 7d ago
  immense amount of houses that are unused because they’re part of speculation, ... This is an extremely well documented, systemic issue in large European metropolis and especially in Berlin. Source? Deutschlandatlas says that Berlin has whole 2 percent of empty apartments for all reasons, which is less then half of German average [0] Some of those apartments are being remodeled, some are just in the period where the previous tenant moved out and the next moved in. There are 16 thousand long-term empty apartments, which looks like a huge number, but it is only 0.8 percent of the total. [1] Even if those 16 thousand apartments could be all put to market (some have legal barriers, like being part of a complicated litigation), that easing would not last even for a single mayor's tenure. Last year alone, Berlin grew up by 17 thousand people. [2] It was not an extraordinary year. ALL that money that the Linke wants to sink into old housing should be spent to build new one, just to accomodate the arrivals. [0] https://www.deutschlandatlas.bund.de/DE/Karten/Wie-wir-wohnen/046-Wohnungsleerstand.html https://www.deutschlandatlas.bund.de/DE/Karten/Wie-wir-wohne... [1] https://www.berlin.de/sen/wohnen/rechtliches/zweckentfremdungsverbot/ https://www.berlin.de/sen/wohnen/rechtliches/zweckentfremdun... [2] https://www.statistik-berlin-brandenburg.de/106-2025/ https://www.statistik-berlin-brandenburg.de/106-2025/
  - 7d ago

tmnvix 7d ago

Same story in NZ.

dash2 7d ago

Hmm, I got curious and read Wikipedia: > Levittowns are six large suburban housing developments, three of which are actually named "Levittown." They were created in the United States (including one in Puerto Rico) by William J. Levitt and his company Levitt & Sons. Built after World War II for returning white veterans and their new families, the communities offered attractive alternatives to cramped central city locations and apartments. The Veterans Administration and the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) guaranteed builders that qualified veterans could buy housing for a fraction of rental costs. Under Levitt & Sons, Levittown housing would maintain racial covenants that excluded non-White would-be buyers. Italics added. Seems the government was somewhat involved in the US too. Of course, now the reason "the free market is terrible at pumping out houses" is government regulation too....

bluegatty 7d ago

Germany doe not have a housing shortage problem, it's another set of problems. (Edit: these are economic problems, productivity, bureaucracy, and all sorts of other things showing up as housing problems) They will have to wail until after WW3 because Russia is openly threatening action, European governments are trying to prepare their citizens, German populists want to return to 'normal relations' with Russia, which means 'use our money to invade and kill everyone to the East of us, just not us'. Germany and Europe is in for a very rough ride. Were it not for the war situation, then we could say this is 'healthy political turmoil' - but this is at a time when outside parties will take advantage of European disunity.

cedilla 7d ago
Berlin has a massive shortage. Vacancy rates are at about 1.5%. Functioning housing markets are at about 3%.
- bluegatty 7d ago
  It's wrong to suggest that vacancy rates are are necessarily sign of housing dysfunction. Areas that are attractive to live always have low vacancy rates, because there's a reason that people want to live there. The assumption that 'as many people ought to be able to live in a neighbourhood as should want to live there' - implied by the 'vacancy rate' issue just means 'every attractive area turns into Hong Kong'. While there can be very good reason for more building as well - socialized housing is almost never the answer to that. It has a role in some situations, but generally not on the aggregate like that. Usually this will have to do with permits, regulation - and frankly workers. Nobody wants to do the kind of labour necessary to build homes, and it's extremely hard to find workers to do that kind of work, which to anyone paying the least bit of attention should be a pretty big paradox. 'City overflowing with people who want homes to live don't want to make homes in which to live' Probably there's a lot of bureaucracy to clean out and that's a good place to start.

GHanku 7d ago

[dead]