Earlier quoted context omitted.
We don't know if that is the primary cause though. The US population was growing at a quicker rate for much of it's history, and that population was more rural, and a number of other reasons we can't rely solely on historical data for our predictions of current behavior. With a closer to zero population growth rate and a more urbanized population we would expect there to be fewer houses built. Additionally, the pure…
location, location, location. Much of the housing price increase has occurred in areas that are doing well economically, but have more or less maxed out the building density currently legally allowed by zoning. today you could build so many houses in Detroit and yet that wouldn't really ease the housing crisis in a place like the Bay. there is also, at least anecdotally, a shortage of skilled tradespeople across cons…
The shortage of skilled labor is another instance where we need to ask why supply is not meeting demand. I think in the case of the supply of skilled construction workers it is not difficult to come up with a plausible explanation that doesn't require any malicious actors.
Anyway, I'm not really trying to make a political point or give everybody my own pet theories as to how this happened. I'm mostly just trying to make the point that the way this issue is generally discussed in the media is economically illiterate at a pretty fundamental level.The observation in the media that supply is not meeting demand is worthless on account of that not being a meaningful statement.