41–50 of 352 posts
Where I live (Albany, NY), they just built thousands of rental units within a 15 mile radius. In one example, they are trying to rent a "luxury" two bedroom for $2500/mo, when you have a much nicer home a few blocks away for $200k+$50k for a fancy kitchen, etc.
Clicked on that list hoping to see good news in Seattle... turns out we're up more than any other city in the top 10. Sigh. There actually is a decent amount of housing construction in progress but it seems like it's not nearly enough.
/S/
I know nothing about the San Francisco housing market apart from what I've heard in discussions here on HN. The received wisdom here seemed to be that powerful NIMBY lobbies in SF were preventing needed development and causing the sky-high rent. But this article is talking about an "historic construction boom". Did something change regarding development in SF? Or was the NIMBY effect always a bit over-stated? Anyone…
Speculation that this is the case in SF, but is an effect I've seen: You can get a dip in average rent without (sufficiently) dropping bottom quartile rents, which is what NIMBYism tends to block, by having a lot of nice condos built. The top quartile of rents dips heavily as places jockey for condo buyers, everyone moves in to a nicer place as the wave spreads, but the price at the bottom remains (mostly) the same (…
Also there is an impact on increasing AirBnB regulation both from cities and from landlords. Now there are often very explict callouts in a rental lease that specifically mentions getting money for the use of your apartment from non-family members. That means you're not going to be able to monetize that second bedroom to pare back your housing expense.
Someone should tell all the protestors who opposed construction of new luxury condos because they thought it would somehow increase rents.
adblocked. bye!
It is extremely frustrating that they actually show the content, let you read a paragraph or so, THEN won't let you continue without paying in some way. I won't be supporting this website.
Have there been any experiments in legislating ceilings for housing prices? If so, what has been the effect?
Ceilings on property sales prices are very rare. Probably the most common example is resale price caps on government sponsored housing for lower income buyers.
Price ceilings on rent are more common but still rare. This is commonly known as rent control.
Like all price caps the result is shortages in varying degrees depending on how binding the ceiling is. If the rent/price is set below operating/construction costs you will see very little avalabilty/construction. On the other hand if the ceiling is set well above the "natural" rent/price there will be little if any impact. In between you will see increasing shortages as the ceiling decreases.
This is generally basic economics but can get pretty complex depending on the details of the specific policy. Taking thsee details into account as well as the unusual nature or real estate (durability, immobility, etc.) the actual results have lined up very well with the theoretical predictions.
Amazing, supply and demand actually works! Someone should tell all the protestors who opposed construction of new luxury condos because they thought it would somehow increase rents.
I know nothing about the San Francisco housing market apart from what I've heard in discussions here on HN. The received wisdom here seemed to be that powerful NIMBY lobbies in SF were preventing needed development and causing the sky-high rent. But this article is talking about an "historic construction boom". Did something change regarding development in SF? Or was the NIMBY effect always a bit over-stated? Anyone…
Source: friend who's been in Bay Area real estate for over a decade.
Amazing, supply and demand actually works! Someone should tell all the protestors who opposed construction of new luxury condos because they thought it would somehow increase rents.