4 ms·

They do want to pay landlords, though below current (very high) rates. In San Francisco, NIMBYs secretly support laws like this. This basically guarantees that

They do want to pay landlords, though below current (very high) rates. In San Francisco, NIMBYs secretly support laws like this. This basically guarantees that many builders will do the math and conclude that it doesn't make sense to build housing in San Francisco. New large condo buildings have to sell 30% of the units at below market rate. This causes many viable projects to never get built. So laws like this are sold to renter voters as a way to lower housing costs, but NIMBYs secretly love it. Over time, renters pay more in rent because there is less supply due to builders not building. However, a lucky few renters who were here early will get below market rents. Perfect examples of voters voting for a short term fix but pay more in long term. And voting for themselves while screwing future renters.

vrganj 12d ago
The fix is for the city to be the builder, like it is in Vienna. The City of Vienna is the largest landlord in Europe. It is also the only major European capital without a rent cost crisis.
- specproc 12d ago
  Similarly UK cities built their own housing, up until Thatcher and Right to Buy. Costs spiralled out of control after that. Most urgent intervention required in the UK, IMO. We're choking to death on the cost of housing.
- fileeditview 12d ago
  You would think that people could learn from examples. Sadly it rarely happens.
  - spwa4 12d ago
    The example here being that they would pay a lot more city tax, never own a home, and over a period of decades this would make rent prices go down. If this is what people want, then it seems like the right solution. Short term the only change will be increased taxes and maybe a few lucky renters getting apartments with the number slowly increasing over years and years. Which is pretty much the situation in Vienna (rents are low in Vienna, but for the 20% that get city-owned apartments the rents are very low. Quality is ... let's call it "very old", and there's no choice (can't move up if you have a kid, say). Then housing associations pay like 30% more but less than private. Private rents are about double city-owned apartments as they're called. Only way to become a city renter is to earn less than 58000 in a given year, then wait 5+ years).
- MrMember 12d ago
  The fix is to let the companies who want to build, build. For some reason a lot of cities won't support new construction if a private company might make a profit on it.
  - blahblaher 12d ago
    Most private construction is dedicated to luxury condos because that's where the big money is. If you let the "market" decide on its own it will always decide on the most profitable items, even if that's not what is needed.
    - vrganj 12d ago
      Yes. The market is a great optimizer, sure, but the question is always what do you actually want to optimize for? And that might not always be the same optimization function as a market.
    - aurareturn 12d ago
      Define "needed". Those luxury condos will still have people living in them whether it's a renter or owner.
      - vrganj 12d ago
        Well, that's what a democracy should be used to decide, since people might have different things they want to optimize for. Personally, I believe Berlin has more issues with a lack of affordable housing than with a lack of luxury condos.
        bluecalm 12d ago
        Adding luxury housing helps with supply of affordable housing. Just a few citations I quickly googled: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0094119021000656 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00941... https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094119022001048 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S009411902... https://archive.is/2026.02.23-212725/https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/02/housing-crisis-rich-poor-building/686086/ https://archive.is/2026.02.23-212725/https://www.theatlantic...
nextaccountic 12d ago
There's a way to get yourself out of that gridlock: just subsidize housing. The builder gets money from both the buyer and the government, so he will be happy. The buyer will have low income and wouldn't be able to buy a house otherwise, so he will be happy too. And the government will actually have fulfilled its role for a change.
- aurareturn 12d ago
  Subsidizing housing... money will have to come from somewhere - usually the middle class. I shouldn't have to subsidize my neighbor's rental just because they chose to live in my city.
- snapplebobapple 12d ago
  The other, better way is to lower government cost of building by having loose zoning and approving everything that fits the zon*ng fast with minimal expense. The non government cost side you should not be broadly subsidizing (you should be fixing market abuses that drive prices up lile making it disadvantageous to sit on unproductive land but thats a complex side topic)
- iamnothere 12d ago
  Georgist-style LVT would also solve the problem, fairly quickly. Many owners would rush to sell to developers or build additional units where space allows.
illiac786 12d ago
Is there data that market rate has zero margin left when it comes to renting? Genuinely interested. Where I live, I have received direct reports that there is almost zero margin between building cost and market price (buying). But buying and then renting still has a good ROI, although a longer term one. I don’t get it, it goes against the market self regulation, but real estate is very twisted in this respect.

vrganj 12d ago

The fix is for the city to be the builder, like it is in Vienna. The City of Vienna is the largest landlord in Europe. It is also the only major European capital without a rent cost crisis.

specproc 12d ago
Similarly UK cities built their own housing, up until Thatcher and Right to Buy. Costs spiralled out of control after that. Most urgent intervention required in the UK, IMO. We're choking to death on the cost of housing.
fileeditview 12d ago
You would think that people could learn from examples. Sadly it rarely happens.
- spwa4 12d ago
  The example here being that they would pay a lot more city tax, never own a home, and over a period of decades this would make rent prices go down. If this is what people want, then it seems like the right solution. Short term the only change will be increased taxes and maybe a few lucky renters getting apartments with the number slowly increasing over years and years. Which is pretty much the situation in Vienna (rents are low in Vienna, but for the 20% that get city-owned apartments the rents are very low. Quality is ... let's call it "very old", and there's no choice (can't move up if you have a kid, say). Then housing associations pay like 30% more but less than private. Private rents are about double city-owned apartments as they're called. Only way to become a city renter is to earn less than 58000 in a given year, then wait 5+ years).
MrMember 12d ago
The fix is to let the companies who want to build, build. For some reason a lot of cities won't support new construction if a private company might make a profit on it.
- blahblaher 12d ago
  Most private construction is dedicated to luxury condos because that's where the big money is. If you let the "market" decide on its own it will always decide on the most profitable items, even if that's not what is needed.
  - vrganj 12d ago
    Yes. The market is a great optimizer, sure, but the question is always what do you actually want to optimize for? And that might not always be the same optimization function as a market.
  - aurareturn 12d ago
    Define "needed". Those luxury condos will still have people living in them whether it's a renter or owner.
    - vrganj 12d ago
      Well, that's what a democracy should be used to decide, since people might have different things they want to optimize for. Personally, I believe Berlin has more issues with a lack of affordable housing than with a lack of luxury condos.
      - bluecalm 12d ago
        Adding luxury housing helps with supply of affordable housing. Just a few citations I quickly googled: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0094119021000656 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00941... https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094119022001048 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S009411902... https://archive.is/2026.02.23-212725/https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/02/housing-crisis-rich-poor-building/686086/ https://archive.is/2026.02.23-212725/https://www.theatlantic...

nextaccountic 12d ago

There's a way to get yourself out of that gridlock: just subsidize housing. The builder gets money from both the buyer and the government, so he will be happy. The buyer will have low income and wouldn't be able to buy a house otherwise, so he will be happy too. And the government will actually have fulfilled its role for a change.

aurareturn 12d ago
Subsidizing housing... money will have to come from somewhere - usually the middle class. I shouldn't have to subsidize my neighbor's rental just because they chose to live in my city.
snapplebobapple 12d ago
The other, better way is to lower government cost of building by having loose zoning and approving everything that fits the zon*ng fast with minimal expense. The non government cost side you should not be broadly subsidizing (you should be fixing market abuses that drive prices up lile making it disadvantageous to sit on unproductive land but thats a complex side topic)
iamnothere 12d ago
Georgist-style LVT would also solve the problem, fairly quickly. Many owners would rush to sell to developers or build additional units where space allows.

illiac786 12d ago

Is there data that market rate has zero margin left when it comes to renting? Genuinely interested. Where I live, I have received direct reports that there is almost zero margin between building cost and market price (buying). But buying and then renting still has a good ROI, although a longer term one. I don’t get it, it goes against the market self regulation, but real estate is very twisted in this respect.