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

San Diego rents declined following surge in supply

kpbs.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 253 posts

Re: San Diego rents declined following surge in supply

#101

Post by epistasis »

throwaway27448 wrote: post #61
epistasis wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just public housing it's all housing. Even some public housing advocates argue against housing reforms that would make it possible to build public housing! I've been supporting an advocacy group looking to build social housing and at least half the pushback is from anti-housing "tenant advocates" that work for non-profits funded by extremely foundations with boards that are all very wealthy with multiple hom…

Well obviously fuck those guys, but we need to build housing people are going to actually live in

Pretty much all housing is housing that people are going to live in...

Unless you are only talking about housing for a certain type of people, and that you'll only approve housing for that type of people, otherwise no housing? That's a very common position that I disagree with strongly.

Soak the rich, let them pay for the high cost of new housing, and it benefits everyone.

For public housing, it should be for all incomes so that those with high incomes subsidize those with lower incomes, so that the public housing has support throughout all levels of society when it comes to vote for maintenance every year, so that when there's a budget cut it's all of society fighting to ensure that the public housing is maintained.

We need to break out of the idea that only some people deserve to get housing, and that we should build just for that narrow band of people. New housing is expensive, we need a lot of it, and those with money are the ones who should pay for it.

Re: San Diego rents declined following surge in supply

#102

Post by BrenBarn »

mpyne wrote: post #99
BrenBarn wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is whether the well-off person moved in from the same market, or from elsewhere. (Also, whether they vacate their previous unit or, e.g., keep it as a vacation home.)

None of those are really pertinent because it doesn't change the fact that the well-off person is going to occupy an additional housing unit in this scenario no matter what. The question is whether it's going to be new construction that they occupy or existing construction. If you're not well-off you'd want that decision to end up with "new construction" so you can move into "existing construction" at a lower rent/mo…

I don't think that is necessarily true. I believe there are, for instance, many reasonably wealthy people who live somewhere outside California and would not move into a dumpy old apartment in LA or SF but might move into a fancy new one. In other words, they will not occupy an additional housing unit (in a given market) unless it is "nice" enough.

I am in favor of building new housing, but I'm even more in favor of reducing wealth inequality. I think we can do both, but we need to be deliberate about it.

Re: San Diego rents declined following surge in supply

#104

Post by epistasis »

abdullahkhalids wrote: post #55
epistasis wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't need quantitative models if we want the rock to fall. It might be nice to have them, but one of the great things about market economies is that we don't micromanage according to overly complex estimates, and get better results. Zoning and homeowners are holding on to the rock with a death grip, all while saying "the rock won't fall if we let go, that's fake science, it's far more nuanced you see" as they lie…

The quantitative model will tell you whether building housing of type A of quantity B results in more of a decrease in rent than building housing of type C of quantity D. Then you choose the policy that results in the desired decrease in rent. Otherwise, you risk wasting time in pursuing a policy that only results in a 0.1% decrease.

You do have a strong point, in that homeowners are eager to approve plans that allow for ADUs but disallow anything slightly larger. Homeowners already have housing, don't often need more of it, and like having complete control so they approve plans that allow ADUS with the knowledge that it won't account for any significant new housing, and new housing is directly against homeowners' financial interests.

But in reality, the political choice of "let's build A, or B, or C" doesn't exist to maximize the effect of housing. People overly focus on highly regulating to a specific type of housing to prevent anything from getting built.

Let people decide for their own what type of housing they want, and all of a sudden we'd have enough of it. That's the biggest fear of landlords and homeowners.

Re: San Diego rents declined following surge in supply

#106

Post by itopaloglu83 »

mothballed wrote: post #16
exabrial wrote: post #10

Incredible. So what you're saying is... we should just build more housing? Who would have thought that was the answer?

Building the house is the easiest part of building a house.

Some: Not in my backyard.

A lot of people have vested interest in keeping the housing pricing high. That’s also pretty much why zoning and other regulations never get updated to match the demand.

Re: San Diego rents declined following surge in supply

#108

Post by LudwigNagasena »

exabrial wrote: post #10

Incredible. So what you're saying is... we should just build more housing? Who would have thought that was the answer?

There is abundance of housing. It's just that people want to live in big metro areas that have extreme concentration of economic opportunity and amenities.

I don't understand how transforming every urban area into Kowloon Walled City will solve that unless your plan is to make it so dense that people will finally find it undesirable to live there?

Re: San Diego rents declined following surge in supply

#109

Post by fragmede »

blendo wrote: post #105

"we've shown a pretty significant increase in the number of new housing permits each year, we’re closing in on the 10,000 mark for the last two years" Does that mean the "surge in supply" is really a surge in permits?

Funny thing about permits...

Re: San Diego rents declined following surge in supply

#110

Post by throwaway27448 »

epistasis wrote: post #101
throwaway27448 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well obviously fuck those guys, but we need to build housing people are going to actually live in

Pretty much all housing is housing that people are going to live in... Unless you are only talking about housing for a certain type of people, and that you'll only approve housing for that type of people, otherwise no housing? That's a very common position that I disagree with strongly. Soak the rich, let them pay for the high cost of new housing, and it benefits everyone. For public housing, it should be for all inc…

Yes, we all have a right to a decent place to live! But unless we can accept public ownership of land (and therefore housing), there's not much to iterate on and we're left with today's reality where we happily let millions live on the street for no fucking reason
Post reply on HN