Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California’s affordable housing problem is really a national one

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 299 posts

Re: California’s affordable housing problem is really a national one

#181

Post by tqi »

davidw wrote: post #160
tqi wrote: post #141

Why is this always framed as a problem caused by people looking for a place to live? I moved to SF for a job. I'm not the one who decided to not build enough new housing for 30 years. I'm not the one who decided to approve all those new office buildings. Yet I was the problem for renting an overpriced apartment from an SF native who bought in the 90s, and now pays less than $8K/yr in taxes on a place worth over $1M.…

I don't think the article frames it that way, really, if you look at the conclusion. I'd also highly recommend his book for an introduction to land use politics, centered around the bay area: https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/585765/golden-gates...

I can see that, but the headline[1] and much of the first half of the article[2] strongly imply it (imo).

[1] The Californians Are Coming. So Is Their Housing Crisis [2] Example: According to a recent study by Redfin, the national real estate brokerage, the budget for out-of-town home buyers moving to Boise is 50 percent higher than locals’ — $738,000 versus $494,000. In Nashville, out-of-towners also have a budget that is 50 percent higher than locals. In Austin it’s 32 percent, Denver 26 percent and Phoenix 23 percent.

Re: California’s affordable housing problem is really a national one

#182

Post by nine_k »

nly wrote: post #158
nutshell89 wrote: post #100

The problem is that not only is there zero appetite to phase out housing-as-investment boosting policies like the mortgage interest deduction, imputed rent exemption, and cap gains exemption at the federal level, en vogue affordable housing strategies have focused on keeping interest rates low, providing 1st time home-buyer tax credits, and strengthening fair lending regulations. The U.S.(western nations with high ho…

In the UK mortgage interest deductions were eliminated from income tax but it just pushed professional landlords to move to holding property in more elaborate incorporated structures

Did it lower prices for non-landlord home buyers?

Re: California’s affordable housing problem is really a national one

#183

Post by Lammy »

tqi wrote: post #141

Why is this always framed as a problem caused by people looking for a place to live? I moved to SF for a job. I'm not the one who decided to not build enough new housing for 30 years. I'm not the one who decided to approve all those new office buildings. Yet I was the problem for renting an overpriced apartment from an SF native who bought in the 90s, and now pays less than $8K/yr in taxes on a place worth over $1M.…

> Why is this always framed as a problem caused by people looking for a place to live?

It would have been hard to win friends or votes if anti-housing people 50 years ago disclosed what segment of "people looking for a place to live" bothered them so much. It's no coincidence that this all starts around the 1968–1974 period: https://belonging.berkeley.edu/racial-segregation-san-franci...

Re: California’s affordable housing problem is really a national one

#184

Post by Shivetya »

davidw wrote: post #102
jeffbee wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's handy to say "nowhere is building" but it's not really supported by the data. Look at Dallas and Houston compared to San Francisco. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=B6Tc

BTW, for people looking for other examples of how to grow, who might not like the idea of Houston's sprawl, I've always liked this article: https://www.sightline.org/2017/09/21/yes-you-can-build-your-...

however as the pandemic has shown us, we may as a whole starting to realize how much your location doesn't matter in technology jobs which will go a good way to freeing up more space for affordable housing in metropolitan areas.

the real reckoning to come is all these tax authorities looking to make up the losses from the exodus and use of facilities in town. a lot was built up not to just serve the population but to reward political friends by making sure they had the properties and contracts to build and even run businesses in town. that gravy train for the tax coffers and political campaigns won't go down without a fight.

one faster way of building out new housing is not rezoning existing areas of housing but going after areas that are not currently zoned for any housing. especially true are larger commercial districts that have collapsed or seen sufficient change to where most businesses up and left. plus removing the requirements that only union labor can be used will help as well in addition to allow hiring people who need work but are not attractive to union employers (most of these rules were originally put in place in the North stop cheaper labor cost black worker construction companies from getting a foothold - go look it up)

Re: California’s affordable housing problem is really a national one

#185

Post by bedhead »

ashtonkem wrote: post #162
zippergz wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've lived in several US cities over the course of my life, and the only constant is that whoever you talk to, the problems are caused by the people who moved there after them.

I’d say that another constant is the belief that living in a place for a certain period of time confers a sense of ownership over a city, along with the right to decide who should and should not live there. You obviously see that in states where Californians are moving, but you even see that in California against those who moved there recently for a job. Frankly I find it completely bizarre.

Both of these comments are so viscerally true. I live most of the year in a very small town (as in, no home mail service) that's also a big tourist destination. It has all the usual tension between townies, second home owners, and tourists, but the thing that really shocked me when I moved here was how there is a sort of caste system among locals with a bunch of dimensions like how long you've lived there, if you own a shop in town, if you are on a town council, etc. Living here can be strange. On one hand, some of the people are extraordinarily friendly, while on the other, I've never felt more unwelcome in a place in my entire life.

Re: California’s affordable housing problem is really a national one

#186

Post by jseliger »

asdff wrote: post #4

Nowhere is building enough housing for growth. In low cost of living places, chances are if you look at population data, the metro region has been stagnant for decades which has alleviated pressure on supply. In any area with growth at all, prices rise because we don't build actual dense housing like we did before WWII (when row houses and mixed use development in walking distance to frequent public transit were the…

Nowhere is building enough housing for growth

Factually untrue: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16704501

Re: California’s affordable housing problem is really a national one

#187

Post by kodablah »

xenadu02 wrote: post #171
mpg33 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Texas is also a good example of that density only matters if there is a land scarcity problem. There are areas in Canada where building massive towers has been premature and also led to increase in costs.

Not really. Dallas is an example of a metro area that has extended sprawl as far as it can go. A ton of new highways have been built out but growth in car usage and population have eaten back all the gains. There will never be enough land to make the sprawl work. As a result home prices there are jumping just like everywhere else. No one wants a 2 hour commute.

Not as far as it can go. It can still go many dozens of miles in every direction, and has, and will continue. Companies are following employees to the burbs and employees are moving even more with the uptick of remote work. Home prices are jumping due to population, but sprawl continues unabated.

Re: California’s affordable housing problem is really a national one

#188

Post by Dma54rhs »

zippergz wrote: post #170
ashtonkem wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d say that another constant is the belief that living in a place for a certain period of time confers a sense of ownership over a city, along with the right to decide who should and should not live there. You obviously see that in states where Californians are moving, but you even see that in California against those who moved there recently for a job. Frankly I find it completely bizarre.

I know this is kind of the opposite of the (mostly joking) point I made that you replied to. But the thing I find bizarre is that people can't understand why other people oppose change in the place they live in. Most people choose places to live because they like those places. I think it's safe to say that the things they like extend beyond the four walls of the residence they buy or rent. They might like the walkabi…

Because it's quite xenophobic behavior, you say diversity but mean the diversity of people who you happen to like. It's rather easy to be tolerant if only things that you like apply. You can hear exactly the same things racists say about their small towns changing without all these sophisticated meaningless words.

Re: California’s affordable housing problem is really a national one

#189

Post by mint2 »

opportune wrote: post #131
nutshell89 wrote: post #100

The problem is that not only is there zero appetite to phase out housing-as-investment boosting policies like the mortgage interest deduction, imputed rent exemption, and cap gains exemption at the federal level, en vogue affordable housing strategies have focused on keeping interest rates low, providing 1st time home-buyer tax credits, and strengthening fair lending regulations. The U.S.(western nations with high ho…

I think removing many of these housing discounts would only partially impact housing costs, since these affect the majority of buyers and most home purchasing decisions are made on the basis of the monthly payment. That is, after removing some of these policies, people would probably still end up paying the same monthly payment, just with lower nominal housing costs. The bigger issue to me is the constriction of supp…

I take issue with the “too much protected land” stance. The protected land is a treasure. And paving it over with suburbs will not fix housing. See LA. Vast sprawl and still sky high housing. Oh it’s a wee bit better prices? Let’s pave everything. Turning the Bay Area into la or Phoenix sounds like an awful idea.

Densifying I can get behind, turning the protected lands into a concrete wasteland of parking lots and hoa developments of boxes and mandated office parkish landscaping is not something to advocate. Is that really the best we can do?

Re: California’s affordable housing problem is really a national one

#190

Post by jayd16 »

nine_k wrote: post #175
jayd16 wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it everyone else's problem to accommodate you? >I'm not the one who decided to not build enough new housing for 30 years. California's population has increased 4x since 1950 vs 2x for the country as a whole, more so in SF. To say there is no new housing is just ignoring the (finally waning) population boom.

The OP pays a market-rate rent and local taxes for the accommodation. What "everybody else" is doing?

The tone suggests OP is entitled to more and that housing policy should change to benefit them over other residents. Its a common sentiment I see on HN that seems to suggest California should continue to bend to support new residents.

I have no problem with the people that move to California but the back pressure is bound to happen and native Californians seem despised for it.

Post reply on HN