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

101–110 of 198 posts

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

#101

Post by TedShiller »

mjmahone17 wrote: post #95
TedShiller wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ent…

> we surely could double in population without breaking any real physical constraints

I'm sure you could also house a few extra people in need in your living room!

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

#102

Post by DoreenMichele »

Without reading all 47 pages, this (below) seems to be the crux of what it is talking about -- cheap, small factory-built single family detached homes. And I am skeptical because my research suggests we don't need crappier single family detached homes. Instead, we need more missing middle housing and similar.

It’s clear why these homes are a threat to those constructing stick-built homes, especially in the lower-priced home market, and why monopolies in traditional construction have invested so heavily in blocking these small-modular homes. The homes are of high-quality, built to a strict national building code. They are manufactured at a cost per square foot that is one-third to one-half less than the cost per square foot to construct homes with traditional methods.4 Not only can factory production methods produce houses at a fraction of the cost per square foot of traditional methods, factory methods are also able to “go small.” That is, factory methods are able to economically produce homes of small sizes.5 The average size of these homes (in square feet) is less than one-half that of homes constructed with traditional methods.

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

#103

Post by [deleted] »

monocasa wrote: post #21
adam_arthur wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Population is flat over the last two years, while housing units are up and the construction rate is all time high. There is no crisis, just rampant speculation that ate through active inventory. The actual data is very clear on this (FRED), despite the word of mouth "shortage" narrative. Now that the narrative is turning, inventory is skyrocketing as you would expect, and we will be in a glut within 6 months. Look at…

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

[deleted]

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

#104

Post by jtode »

sokoloff wrote: post #84
softfalcon wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they’re trying to say that “higher construction costs” is literally the “multi-million dollar bids” to own property without going through a HOA. For the average person, this makes the land and construction costs unobtainable for the average person, effectively creating a monopoly for the builders and the HOA organizations with deep pockets to bid.

Is monopoly the right word for a set of thousands of developers competing to develop land and build new neighborhoods?

[flagged]

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

#105

Post by mumblemumble »

thfuran wrote: post #100
teakettle42 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Past a certain level of density, the only thing you can realistically own is a condominium. The key differences between renting an apartment and buying a condo that I was able to identify seem to be that condos are more expensive, harder to get out of if you want to move, and not covered by the city's tenant bill of rights ordinance.

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

#106

Post by awaywithcovid »

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…

+1

There is a large stock of existing single family houses that cost as much as buying a car - $50,000. In theory, anyone with $5K down and can afford a $200/month mortgage can get a single family house in quite a number of cities.

In practice, the problem with the housing market goes way beyond the economic basics of land, construction, ZIRP.

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

#107

Post by almost_usual »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #99
almost_usual wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

Quality of life

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

#108

Post by TedShiller »

workingon wrote: post #80
TedShiller wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't afford to live in NYC or SF or LA either, but that doesn't mean I can't afford a place to live. If someone cannot afford to live in the most desirable locations in the world, but they can live almost anywhere else, that is not a crisis.

The cognitive disconnect is pretty insane here. Affordability issues are a widespread phenomen. You may be able to remote work in a low cost of living area, but the type of people who have housing instability can't. They have to be supported by the shit-tier wages in the low cost of living area, which is why it's a low cost of living area. Except now the "low cost" housing there takes up more than half someone's inco…

Housing in the most desirable areas of the world is unaffordable (i.e. very expensive), that's true. But then so are Gucci bags and Ferraris.

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

#109

Post by jelliclesfarm »

winkeltripel wrote: post #82
jelliclesfarm wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://calmatters.org/housing/2022/05/california-housing-cr... : example..more recently as to how unions control housing supply.. [..]Anti-worker or pro-worker? Why labor unions are fighting over a housing bill The bill, which has the support of Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, would allow housing that is 100% affordable to low-income households to be built “by right” on areas now zoned for offices, retail and parki…

> how much unionized labor developers would have to use to take advantage of the streamlining That seems like a reasonable clause to me. It sounds like what anyone would want their union to do.

The reasonable clause is responsible for housing shortage and restrictions. NIMBYism and prop 13 is not..we are all being side tracked and gaslit while there are many powerful and potent forces that control and restrict housing supply in California.

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

#110

Post by SoftTalker »

mumblemumble wrote: post #105
thfuran wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Higher density doesn't necessarily mean all rentals.

Past a certain level of density, the only thing you can realistically own is a condominium. The key differences between renting an apartment and buying a condo that I was able to identify seem to be that condos are more expensive, harder to get out of if you want to move, and not covered by the city's tenant bill of rights ordinance.

Rentals must on average cover the debt, taxes, and profit for the owner. The tennant pays monthly rent including all of the above and has nothing to show for it when the lease ends.

Condos at least build some equity that you can recover when you sell. Sure there are some risks and maintenance costs that renters don't "pay" but it's all included in the rent, over time.

Post reply on HN