241–250 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it's crazy that people nowadays seriously question basic market pressure being a thing
Who are the people that “seriously question basic market pressure being a thing”? Am I missing something?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You have to restrict investors buying up that newly built housing too. Homes for people. Not investors.
35% of Americans rent their homes. And they almost invariably rent from investors. Therefore if more than 35% of homes are owned by investors this drives down rent. If less than 35% are owned by investors rent goes up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or develop 12 competing apps that each only work in different lots.
A fellow Swede I presume? It's extra silly cause I once parked in central Oslo and got the ticket mailed to my sthlm address. No fuss, no problem, super easy! We got a lot to learn from our neighbours....
Earlier quoted context omitted.
New construction has already decelerated in Austin due to falling prices, which compresses already-near-zero margin on real estate development. So yes, it really is "just build more housing." The problem is: why would you build more housing as prices fall?
Because home builders don't make money by buying and selling houses, they make money by building them and selling them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
New construction has already decelerated in Austin due to falling prices, which compresses already-near-zero margin on real estate development. So yes, it really is "just build more housing." The problem is: why would you build more housing as prices fall?
Construction costs don't scale linearly with rent prices, it's a different market altogether that depends on regulation/worker supply/material costs/equipment/etc. As long as construction costs remain below the value of the units all-in, there's profit motive for developers to build.
Not true
Real estate development is extremely capital intensive and therefore it's a question of all-in cost of capital compared to other investment opportunities.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
New construction has already decelerated in Austin due to falling prices, which compresses already-near-zero margin on real estate development. So yes, it really is "just build more housing." The problem is: why would you build more housing as prices fall?
Because home builders don't make money by buying and selling houses, they make money by building them and selling them.
I'm not sure what you're trying to imply here. You should spell it out explicitly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Affordable housing is the only type of housing that will ever be built. Builders aren't so stupid as to build products that their customers can't buy. Government intervention is not needed.
And yet, gentrification.
Its wild how the solution to housing costs is really just: Build more housing. Keep law and order. No it doesn’t need to be “affordable”. Yes rent control is a terrible idea. Just build more housing. Note: that the US already has plenty of housing and housing costs basically go up in areas of low crime relative to economic opportunity. If you build housing, but allow crime to rise, you have wasted everybody’s time.
You have to restrict investors buying up that newly built housing too. Homes for people. Not investors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This comment is phrased as if the article is confirming these points when it either doesn't mention them or even directly refutes them. First there is no mention of either crime or rent control in the article. But more importantly, it states that "A key piece of Austin’s strategy has been to encourage the construction of affordable housing." So why are you concluding that affordable housing isn't needed?
Affordable housing is the only type of housing that will ever be built. Builders aren't so stupid as to build products that their customers can't buy. Government intervention is not needed.
Its wild how the solution to housing costs is really just: Build more housing. Keep law and order. No it doesn’t need to be “affordable”. Yes rent control is a terrible idea. Just build more housing. Note: that the US already has plenty of housing and housing costs basically go up in areas of low crime relative to economic opportunity. If you build housing, but allow crime to rise, you have wasted everybody’s time.
the little old lady living in a rent controlled apartment is a big part of why rents are high in that area: she was part of what made the community thrive. we would do well to compensate her for this.