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

Austin’s surge of new housing construction drove down rents

pew.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 1001 posts

Re: Austin’s surge of new housing construction drove down rents

#61

Post by Gigachad »

jakelazaroff wrote: post #44
Gigachad wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess the confounding factor is that the population isn't fixed. Greater construction could result in population growth which cancels out the gains from greater supply. You'd have to build faster than population growth to lower prices. And generally developers aren't looking to do that.

Sure they are. What developer wouldn't rather rent out ten apartments for $2k/mo than two apartments for $4k/mo?

Depends what the situation is, if the rents are absurdly high where you can undercut them and still profit then of course they would rather build more. If they are getting close to cost price, developers won't build more to lower it beyond that. At that point if you want to lower prices more you'd have to look at lowering the cost of construction.

Re: Austin’s surge of new housing construction drove down rents

#62

Post by wbobeirne »

maxerickson wrote: post #40
cheriot wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and each one will hit house owning voters hard making it hard to replicate In a negative way?

As a homeowner, I want number to go up. These things push against that. Really, I'd prefer not having policies that tend to push up housing prices or discourage people from moving, but here we are, those types of policies are common.

As a home owner in Austin, I want my friends to be able to afford homes too and not feel like they have to move to have a yard and a family. Bring on the new construction.

Re: Austin’s surge of new housing construction drove down rents

#63

Post by gtowey »

maxerickson wrote: post #40
cheriot wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and each one will hit house owning voters hard making it hard to replicate In a negative way?

As a homeowner, I want number to go up. These things push against that. Really, I'd prefer not having policies that tend to push up housing prices or discourage people from moving, but here we are, those types of policies are common.

> As a homeowner, I want number to go up.

Which is myopic.

As a homeowner, I want cities to be livable and affordable for those who want or have to live there. I don't care if the value of my home changes one cent. It's honestly kind of useless, because it's not like I can sell the house and buy a nicer one. All the houses are more expensive so it's always going to be a lateral trade. It only helps if you sell and move to a lower cost of living area.

It's kind of a sham that we have been conditioned to treat housing as an investment. Housing is where people live, it shouldn't be a commodity to be hoarded.

Re: Austin’s surge of new housing construction drove down rents

#64

Post by JumpCrisscross »

tkel wrote: post #58
riknos314 wrote: post #4

So glad we don't need to re-write the first chapter of almost every economics 101 textbook!

They also teach you about elasticity in econ 101. It's foolish and anti-intellectual to insist that the housing market has only two factors, while simultaneously condescending about your understanding of economics shows that you really don't understand economics, it's more about your ego.

> It's foolish and anti-intellectual to insist that the housing market has only two factors

Elasticitiy moderates the effect. It doesn't reverse it. Increasing housing supply decreases housing costs. A lot of people are venally or ideologically motivated against accepting this. Our housing crisis is a political choice. (Note: I'm a homeowner.)

Re: Austin’s surge of new housing construction drove down rents

#65

Post by lelandfe »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #33
amelius wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if the people in power don't want prices to go down?

It's typically local residents who fight this. There's a "fuck you, got mine" tendency to pull up the ladder once you've made it.

It's just as much "change is scary" and "I like this as it is." It's a very human reaction.

Re: Austin’s surge of new housing construction drove down rents

#66

Post by lovecg »

cg5280 wrote: post #27
amelius wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if the people in power don't want prices to go down?

The problem isn’t the powers that be. A lot of regular homeowners fight new developments tooth and nail. And many blue states unfortunately give them a lot of tools to do so.

Don’t know why this is being downvoted, that’s exactly right. One needs only to attend a local city meeting about any smallest step towards more development to see how the voters think.

Re: Austin’s surge of new housing construction drove down rents

#68

Post by odyssey7 »

rconti wrote: post #52
strbean wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, parking structures always look and feel pretty distopian. I like the approach of making downtowns walkable and having a bit of parking at the periphery of downtown, along with good public transit. Encourages people to use public transit to get to town in the first place. Downtown residents can use transit or a zipcar or equivalent when the need to get out of town, instead of devoting a ton of space downto…

Well, in Menlo Park they're just flat surface parking lots, not even multi-story structures. The planned development is multi-story housing with parking underneath. To be fair, I am boycotting the (similar) underground garage over at Springline because they're clearly made only for people in Range Rovers or whatever. They have those AWFUL ticket machines, set too far back (to avoid getting hit) and too high to access…

Is the Bay Area really dealing with ticket machines? The global capital of technology? Just bill by plate or something.

Re: Austin’s surge of new housing construction drove down rents

#69

Post by dmix »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #33
amelius wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if the people in power don't want prices to go down?

It's typically local residents who fight this. There's a "fuck you, got mine" tendency to pull up the ladder once you've made it.

They are the ones who show up at local political fundraising galas and constantly report local issues influencing municipal/state priorities.

Although it's not just NIMBY. There's a million rules about building housing and developing land from zoning, environmental, indigenous, or social ends. Which are arguably luxury self-benefiting priorities for people who already own houses. Plus all the activists who think the government can both make development extremely expensive via endless rules while affording to fund mass government housing at the same time.

Post reply on HN