Live data from Hacker News

How cheaper housing can boost productivity

economist.com

21–30 of 62 posts

Re: How cheaper housing can boost productivity

#22
post #2

> One paper published in 2010 found that absenteeism among German workers would be 15-20% lower if they did not commute. If it were somehow possible to scrap commuting altogether, the British economy would see a productivity boost worth £12 billion a year, according to the Centre for Economics and Business Research, a think-tank. Allowing occasional working from home has the same effects, and require no investment in…

> You can have too loose construction law, and the result is a city centre were nobody lives - people just commute to work and back. It's not that Poland (or any other country) needs more laws. It's a problem of incentives, or lack thereof. If a construction company has bribed politicians to keep giving them lucrative gigs on other people's money, they will have no incentive to actually do a good job. If, on the othe…

I don't think the corruption is the main problem here. Nobody pays bribes to paint their commie block in fuchsia-green stripes (it's a thing here, I guess because of 50 years of shades of gray everywhere). Or to put 20-meter tall billboard on their small plot in front of XIII-th century castle. Or to build "Mountainer style one-family-house" between 16th century tenament houses. With huge brick wall all over it, and billboards on every square meter of the wall. It's chaos.

It's just that after communism people consider all regulation "communist-like restriction of God-given freedom".

It changes slowly for last few years, but '90s and '00s were awful.

Re: How cheaper housing can boost productivity

#23

> Unless productivity picks up, wages cannot grow. Investing more in education, health care and technology is the normal way of boosting productivity growth. We could always put progressive tax on capital and property. It will be very efficient redistribution.

Yes these were the rules. And then the rules changed. Now people don't need an education as what are they going to do with that education if there are no jobs. There is no need for more productivity because there are no more jobs, the robotic algorithms are already designed to auto-optimize and so they are as efficient as can be. Health care eats most of the the budget because people are old and don't want to die. etc. etc.

Re: How cheaper housing can boost productivity

#24

Naively assumes that the building restrictions cause permanent productivity losses. Instead, building restrictions likely push some jobs elsewhere. Since housing is too expensive in SF, some tech jobs go to other places. Since housing and office space is too expensive in NYC, some finance jobs go elsewhere. Some amount of municipal planning is a good thing. It provides needed services for residents and increases the…

> push some jobs elsewhere

The theory goes that these high-density population centres have higher productivity, for a couple of reasons:

- "Truer" competition -- distance is an artificial barrier that reduces employees' access to jobs and reduces employers' access to job candidates. It also reduces companies' access to each other.

- More cross-pollination as people a free to move jobs more often and (in theory) have more interactions with other companies.

There are no doubt some downsides to concentrating all of your nation's business in one place, and things like telecommuting and fast public transport will have the effect of bringing people closer together without straining infrastructure as much, but there's really no alternative to density.

Re: How cheaper housing can boost productivity

#25
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is actually in the time and boredom while traveling. So maybe autonomous cars, workplaces in trains or (far fetched ;-) teleportation could improve the 'commuting-problem'. I think most people still like to work physically with other people. That is why I go to a co-worker space. Because I am actually more productive at home.

Boredom while traveling is something that could be solved for most, but it goes against the will of people and various cost-cutting solutions. You could get rid of cars in the big cities and replace them with more public transportation. But people won't willingly give up their cars because of various - often not very rational - reasons, and the public transportation is being developed in the wrong way too. Someone fi…

Yes, individuals optimize traveling focused on cost (less space = cheaper) so they get what they want. Whereas society and employers would like to see higher output. If only 'they' were willing to pay for that.

Personal happiness is mostly a long term goal which does not go well with short term needs.

Re: How cheaper housing can boost productivity

#26
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is actually in the time and boredom while traveling. So maybe autonomous cars, workplaces in trains or (far fetched ;-) teleportation could improve the 'commuting-problem'. I think most people still like to work physically with other people. That is why I go to a co-worker space. Because I am actually more productive at home.

Boredom while traveling is something that could be solved for most, but it goes against the will of people and various cost-cutting solutions. You could get rid of cars in the big cities and replace them with more public transportation. But people won't willingly give up their cars because of various - often not very rational - reasons, and the public transportation is being developed in the wrong way too. Someone fi…

Not so very long ago, there seemed to be a movement in quite the opposite direction: live somewhere car-friendly and work on out-of-town campuses with ample parking.

While I'm another one who believes that the ideal commute is "step across the hallway" (or perhaps an office at the bottom of the garden...), I'd argue that the old low-density promise of commuting 20 or 30 minutes on open roads isn't so bad (and certainly no more taxing than what the public transport/new-urbanist lobby seem to be proposing). Why is this never on the agenda any more?

Re: How cheaper housing can boost productivity

#27

It's funny how HN people are all like "capitalism is awesome!" and then they complain when housing prices are high.

The high prices come from government intervention dude. Good job making yourself look like an uneducated fool.

> A ceiling on rents reduces the quantity and quality of housing available. (93% of economists agree)

http://gregmankiw.blogspot.de/2009/02/news-flash-economists-...

Re: How cheaper housing can boost productivity

#28
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Boredom while traveling is something that could be solved for most, but it goes against the will of people and various cost-cutting solutions. You could get rid of cars in the big cities and replace them with more public transportation. But people won't willingly give up their cars because of various - often not very rational - reasons, and the public transportation is being developed in the wrong way too. Someone fi…

Not so very long ago, there seemed to be a movement in quite the opposite direction: live somewhere car-friendly and work on out-of-town campuses with ample parking. While I'm another one who believes that the ideal commute is "step across the hallway" (or perhaps an office at the bottom of the garden...), I'd argue that the old low-density promise of commuting 20 or 30 minutes on open roads isn't so bad (and certain…

I don't know why there's such "new-urbanist lobby" in the US, but in Europe you can't realize the dream of "open-road commuting" and low-density employment, not without turning the entire continent into one big suburbia. I don't think we have enough land for that.

I'm personally for public transit because of efficiency. Even if you could somehow get that "old low-density promise of commuting 20 or 30 minutes on open road", which would definitely be not a bad situation for commuting, it would still be an energy disaster. Mass transportation and high-density settlements are much more energy-efficient, and energy is one of the biggest problems we're facing as a civilization right now.

Re: How cheaper housing can boost productivity

#29

It's funny how HN people are all like "capitalism is awesome!" and then they complain when housing prices are high.

how MASSIVELY regulated market can be considered capitalism/free market? It's exactly the opposite and so prices are high.

PS capitalism is awesome indeed

Post reply on HN