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

Solving the housing crisis requires fighting monopolies in construction (2020)

minneapolisfed.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 198 posts

Re: Solving the housing crisis requires fighting monopolies in construction (2020)

#91

Post by [deleted] »

mistrial9 wrote: post #90
poutine wrote: post #86

Modern houses are far more complex undertakings than houses built a decade or two ago. This translates to cost. Take a look at something like the BC Energy Step Code https://energystepcode.ca/ and its guidelines on thermal bridging: https://www.bchousing.org/research-centre/library/residentia... It produces better buildings, but this is all new and expensive. Expand this sort of thing all out to all the other compone…

that is one part -- meanwhile, stupid building codes in expensive areas, are real; crooked inspectors in very expensive areas, are real source: four years in construction trades, my own two eyes

[deleted]

Re: Solving the housing crisis requires fighting monopolies in construction (2020)

#92

Post by HarryHirsch »

adam_arthur wrote: post #30
monocasa wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Newborns aren't generally buying houses; the population was growing 25 years ago.

Housing units per working age person is at an all time high and increasing quickly. https://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2022/3/29/50377332-1... On mobile now, but you can confirm the stats on FRED

Housing markets are regional. In my overpriced, overpopulated corner of Western MA construction simply isn't happening. The relevant metric isn't units per person, it's units per workplace. No one is interested if housing is plentiful in any deindustrialized rust belt city when people are moving to either coast.

The person posting that graph has a bridge to sell

Re: Solving the housing crisis requires fighting monopolies in construction (2020)

#93

Post by innagadadavida »

It’s not just the cinateuction lobby, Right now there is deluge of vacant commercial properties. SF alone has around 20Msqft - this translates to 15-20k apartments. Why cannot this be converted? Same glut situation with warehouses, they can be used for housing homeless people.

Re: Solving the housing crisis requires fighting monopolies in construction (2020)

#94

Post by dgfitz »

User23 wrote: post #52

There is plenty of cheap or even virtually free housing available in major cities such as Detroit, Baltimore, St. Louis, and many others, as well as countless trailer parks in any of countless Nowheresvilles, USA. The unspoken dirty little secret is that affordability complaints are really about housing that is around the kind of people the buyer wants to be around and not around the kind of people the buyer doesn't…

Baltimore at least is quite desperate. It’s almost a war zone there.

https://foxbaltimore.com/amp/news/local/national-guard-naacp...

Re: Solving the housing crisis requires fighting monopolies in construction (2020)

#95

Post by mjmahone17 »

TedShiller wrote: post #78
oldgradstudent wrote: post #5

Is there even a shred of evidence that the housing crisis is a result of higher construction costs? Or is the Fed trying to draw attention away from the catastrophic impact of its zero interest and other policies on the massive increase in asset prices?

Don't assume there is even a housing crisis. Not everyone can live in NYC, that is a simple fact. Or LA, or SF. It's physically impossible. If you think building more housing lowers rent, then you've never been to a big city before.

Manhattan has fewer residents today than it did in 1920. It also has much less building happening, and rents are higher now than they were in 1920 for the same square footage. Some of that is we don’t allow people to live in new boarding houses, some of it is that we downzoned the whole city multiple times, and there are a myriad of other reasons we should tackle as well.

It may not be physically possible for the entire world to live in NYC, but we surely could double in population without breaking any real physical constraints. Besides the political constraints that make it absurdly expensive (in time, capital and social power) to build for more growth.

Re: Solving the housing crisis requires fighting monopolies in construction (2020)

#96

Post by notfbi »

adam_arthur wrote: post #22
epistasis wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But is there anything else that might have changed over the past two years thay might add some nuance to it? Such as massive shifts in where people want to live, how much space they want, etc. Looking just at the past two years ignores them past 14 years since the 2008 crisis, from which housing construction is just barely beginning to recover. And houses under construction is not completed house construction rate; e…

Inventory is not the same as structural supply. That's the big mistake many make, and inventory can very quickly accelerate back to a glut when conditions change (few months). There is an element of changing preferences, but city centers also up greatly in price. Can't be the whole story

This research[1] estimates (15.1/23.8) 64% of the increases over pandemic period to remote work change, sounds like it could be a pretty big part of the story.

[1] https://www.nber.org/papers/w30041

Re: Solving the housing crisis requires fighting monopolies in construction (2020)

#97

Post by barry-cotter »

frankfrankfrank wrote: post #33
oldgradstudent wrote: post #5

Is there even a shred of evidence that the housing crisis is a result of higher construction costs? Or is the Fed trying to draw attention away from the catastrophic impact of its zero interest and other policies on the massive increase in asset prices?

I think what is being referred to here in typical mush mouth obtuse language is the "monopolization" that corporations are engaging in buying up massive amounts of real assets with essentially free money the fed it printing at the rate that even the "printing press goes brrrrrr" meme does not do justice. I don't know that people are really aware of the scale of what is going on here. The big finance houses have essen…

It is irrelevant whether land is owned by corporations or private persons for the rent seeking behavior you describe. You’ve reinvented Georgism but with extra unnecessary steps.

Re: Solving the housing crisis requires fighting monopolies in construction (2020)

#98

Post by Patrol8394 »

Solving housing crisis requires making housing not an investment. Make very very very tax inconvenient to buy places for the sole purpose of renting them out. Do this, and most problems are solved. But banks and legislators have no interests in doing so, therefore nothing will ever solve housing crisis. Make peace with it. It will only get worse.

Re: Solving the housing crisis requires fighting monopolies in construction (2020)

#99

Post by paulryanrogers »

almost_usual wrote: post #87
adam_arthur wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firstly, I'm talking nationally. Secondly, the Bay Area is one of the markets subject to some of the more severe headwinds if remote work becomes the new normal, for the reasons you stated. SF population declined ~7% over the past two years. https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/San-Francisco-populat... The concept of being forced to live in a hyper local area for work may be a thing of the past, which doesn't bode…

> Bay area is one of the last places in the country I'd want to own a home right now I’d pick the Bay Area over anywhere else in the US, with or without remote. Judging by real estate prices after remote took off (ignoring condos) I’m guessing a lot of others feel the same way.

Are you thinking resale value or quality of life?

And if resale value then where will you live when you sell?

Re: Solving the housing crisis requires fighting monopolies in construction (2020)

#100

Post by thfuran »

teakettle42 wrote: post #71
schaefer wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a shred of evidence: Las Vegas is a city mostly surrounded by public lands. New private parcels are no longer made available as lots appropriate for single family homes. They are carved onto neighborhood sized chunks, sold to developers directly, and locked into HOA's for all eternity. Only the big boys that can tackle multi-million dollar bids can enrich themselves by the sale of our public lands.

Similar to upzoning land. Only the big-boys that can tackle multi-million dollar bids and rental building development projects can enrich themselves by the upzoning of our existing neighborhoods, locking residents into a permanent rental class for all eternity.

Higher density doesn't necessarily mean all rentals.
Post reply on HN