San Diego rents declined following surge in supply • Hacker News Board

Re: San Diego rents declined following surge in supply

#231

Post by array_key_first » Wed, Apr 22, 2026, 10:05 PM UTC

wallst07 wrote: post #168

mcdeltat wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

God most of the "discussion" around housing is such copium by obviously-biased people trying to convince everyone that we shouldn't have access to high quality housing. Yes, in the year 2026, despite all of humanity's achievements, it's of course IMPOSSIBLE to configure any type of society such that housing is decent and fair for all. IMPOSSIBLE, did you hear? Nope, it just won't work. Whatever your reason, you're wr…

You say this like it is such a obvious problem to solve, and from a naive point of view, maybe so. But each of the reasons why things the way they are isn't just stupidity. It's backed by people's preferences for living. EVERYONE is extremely opinionated on housing because it affects us the most (air/food/water/shelter...) . We all have something to say about where we live or have lived and the pros/cons.

From a cost perspective, it is solved. The communists solved it a long time ago. Build more, denser housing that is therefore much cheaper per-unit.

We don't do that because of people's preferences, and more importantly their will to force their preferences on others. But, it is solved.

Re: San Diego rents declined following surge in supply

#232

Post by darksaints » Wed, Apr 22, 2026, 10:05 PM UTC

jhbadger wrote: post #160

nostrebored wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is empirically not supported. Relaxing zoning rules works extremely well. Look at Japan, look at any metropolitan U.S. city that has actually leaned into it. Europe has had mixed use zones for effectively centuries and is not the dystopia that NIMBYs proclaim will appear in the absence of zoning. It is unpopular because we subsidize the lives and assets of people who “have things” through zoning policy that they…

Up to a point. Yes, it is nice to mix housing and retail and the like, and some zoning laws prevent this. But you have to look back into the 19th century before zoning laws existed and you had things like slaughterhouses opening in residential neighborhoods. Zoning has good reasons to exist.

Correction: zoning had good reasons to exist, but it doesn't anymore. Everything that we used to solve that problem is better solved by environmental laws than it ever was by zoning. It turns out that if you make companies pay for their environmental pollution via noise, chemicals, air pollution, etc., they tend to locate their industrial capacity where it is easier to solve or less impactful.

And while every single reasonable but outdated justification for zoning has slowly disappeared, zoning has been thoroughly co-opted by greedy sociopaths and meddlesome wannabe HOA presidents who want to control their neighbors and police aesthetics and keep out undesirables and inflate the value of their investments.

Re: San Diego rents declined following surge in supply

#233

Post by array_key_first » Wed, Apr 22, 2026, 10:08 PM UTC

LudwigNagasena wrote: post #144

darksaints wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Housing price is a function of supply and demand and your argument had nothing to do with price of housing, you were only talking about density and its effect on livability. And it's very clear that people value living in cities that are much denser than San Diego. If people genuinely do not want a denser San Diego, there wouldn't be any point to restricting that growth. I personally would love to live in a city like…

> Housing price is a function of supply and demand Yes, a function of supply and demand of everything . [1] > your argument had nothing to do with price of housing, you were only talking about density and its effect on livability My argument is that there is no reason to assume that increasing supply by blanket deregulation is a simple and effective solution to the housing crisis that has no downsides. > If people "g…

I think both dense and not dense areas suffer from tragedy of the commons. The only difference is in the suburbs the effect is spread out, so you can kind of pretend it doesn't exist. Which also means that each individual person has the potential to cause more damage.

Re: San Diego rents declined following surge in supply

#234

Post by darksaints » Wed, Apr 22, 2026, 10:13 PM UTC

mothballed wrote: post #156

darksaints wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be willing to bet you every last dollar on the planet that if you read your deed, you will find zero claims to any particular zoning. Zoning is not a transferable property right. It can be changed for any reason at any time.

... with a vote. And subject to the takings clause. The government can also just take your deed and property, again subject to the takings clause, so long as they pay you back. Or claim someone was slinging crack there or something and not pay you back. If you're including things subject to the democratic process all the above is on the table. Also plenty of things written into the deed don't mean shit. It's quite co…

If your neighborhood's zoning isn't in your deed, how are you going to claim it was taken from you?

Zoning is a restriction on your rights...when they are lifted, you are gaining more tangible rights, not losing them. If anything, the takings clause should have applied to properties where zoning was introduced...not where it was removed.

Re: San Diego rents declined following surge in supply

#235

Post by darksaints » Wed, Apr 22, 2026, 10:23 PM UTC

ckemere wrote: post #212

darksaints wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be willing to bet you every last dollar on the planet that if you read your deed, you will find zero claims to any particular zoning. Zoning is not a transferable property right. It can be changed for any reason at any time.

I’d love to take that bet. My deed (in Texas) states that my lot is subject to the rules of the subdivision which include a number of zoning style restrictions. (They’re called “deed restrictions” and are very common AFAIK.) The subdivision rules are changeable only with a supermajority vote. I believe the city (Houston in my case) is prohibited by the state from unilaterally changing them. (I wouldn’t mind more free…

I would gladly see that bet through because that's not zoning, even if its effects are the same as zoning. Subdivision rules are a restrictive covenant (much like how HOAs work). Zoning is not a restrictive covenant, it is by definition a municipally-reserved restriction on land uses, and can be changed at the discretion of the jurisdictional authorities.

I've actually encouraged NIMBYs to use those HOA-style restrictive covenants if they're so adamant on their "zoning" never changing, because a restrictive covenant is actually a volunatory restriction. A city cannot come in and remove them willy nilly (they do in special cases like red-lining, but it is a politically arduous process). Someone with a restrictive covenant by definition has more protection from their neighborhood changing than they would if they just relied on zoning.

The problem is, nobody likes restrictive covenants, and they don't like the HOA-like structures that govern them, and they really don't like the punchable-faced people that seek power in those kinds of organizations.

Re: San Diego rents declined following surge in supply

#236

Post by noosphr » Wed, Apr 22, 2026, 10:25 PM UTC

vkou wrote: post #230

noosphr wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Destroy your society today so it doesn't get potentially destroyed in 30 years is certainly a take. >You solve a housing shortage by... Building more housing. It's not housing. It's roads. Hospitals. Schools. Sewers. Power lines. Everything needs to be rebuilt. That means that the immigrants who are coming in must be engineers, doctors, teachers, tradies. Instead we get uber drivers and IT consultants. There aren't e…

> Destroy your society today so it doesn't get potentially destroyed in 30 years is certainly a take. Immigrants coming in today aren't 'destroying society'. And it's not 'potentially'. It's certainly . Nativists have no answers to it, and if they actually presented the dilemma of 'We can keep Pablo out, and also anyone currently under the age of 40 will have to work until they are 75', not a single person would give…

>And by the way - Canada needs to invite at least half a million people a year in order to maintain the population at a steady-state. That number is the table stakes.

In 2025 total deaths in Canada were 334,699, totals births were 368,928.

The table stakes is -30,000 immigrants last year.

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=171000...

>Why does it need to be rebuilt on anything beyond a regular depreciation schedule in a steady-population situation?

Canada is not at steady state. It's been growing at over 1% since 2000:

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/population-and-demograp...

Re: San Diego rents declined following surge in supply

#237

Post by wallst07 » Thu, Apr 23, 2026, 2:08 AM UTC

acdha wrote: post #178

wallst07 wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No True Scotsman? They are progressive (Statistically)... it's just that they are human too. Meaning they can have progressive ideology and vote for weed, pronouns, but when you touch the wallet, not so much.

You raise a fair point but I think you can draw a line between people who actually do progressive things in other areas and those who sometimes use the language but never show up for anything other than preserving the status quo.

Agreed, it's a spectrum.

Re: San Diego rents declined following surge in supply

#238

Post by solatic » Thu, Apr 23, 2026, 4:37 AM UTC

garbawarb wrote: post #215

nextlsj wrote: post #197

[flagged]

So low supply is good for the economy because it keeps people working.

Quite the opposite: retirees will flee to low cost of living areas, taking the money that they spend in other sectors (food, health, entertainment, etc.) elsewhere.

Re: San Diego rents declined following surge in supply

#239

Post by vkou » Thu, Apr 23, 2026, 5:13 AM UTC

noosphr wrote: post #236

vkou wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Destroy your society today so it doesn't get potentially destroyed in 30 years is certainly a take. Immigrants coming in today aren't 'destroying society'. And it's not 'potentially'. It's certainly . Nativists have no answers to it, and if they actually presented the dilemma of 'We can keep Pablo out, and also anyone currently under the age of 40 will have to work until they are 75', not a single person would give…

>And by the way - Canada needs to invite at least half a million people a year in order to maintain the population at a steady-state. That number is the table stakes. In 2025 total deaths in Canada were 334,699, totals births were 368,928. The table stakes is -30,000 immigrants last year. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=171000... https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=171000... >W…

> In 2025 total deaths in Canada were 334,699, totals births were 368,928.

If you think that's not a problem, stop cherrypicking numbers, and look at Canada's population pyramid. And then tell me what will happen as the big fat middle, that starts at 25... ages out of work. Do you think that little sliver of 0-24s are going to be holding everyone else up?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Canada#/media/...

Those are the numbers you need to be looking at. Oh, and emigration isn't zero, but someone leaving the country isn't counted as a death on the census. 120,000 people emigrated in 2025.

Re: San Diego rents declined following surge in supply

#240

Post by noosphr » Thu, Apr 23, 2026, 9:35 AM UTC

vkou wrote: post #239

noosphr wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And by the way - Canada needs to invite at least half a million people a year in order to maintain the population at a steady-state. That number is the table stakes. In 2025 total deaths in Canada were 334,699, totals births were 368,928. The table stakes is -30,000 immigrants last year. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=171000... https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=171000... >W…

> In 2025 total deaths in Canada were 334,699, totals births were 368,928. If you think that's not a problem, stop cherrypicking numbers, and look at Canada's population pyramid. And then tell me what will happen as the big fat middle, that starts at 25... ages out of work. Do you think that little sliver of 0-24s are going to be holding everyone else up? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Canada#/media/..…

In that case we aren't in a steady state population case and we need to build schools, hospitals, public transport, water, power etc.

Which means that we need stop importing low skill labor in the IT and services industry and move to high skill labor.

The developing world unfortunately doesn't produce enough for the current immigration levels in the west. Ergo we must lower immigration until the ratio of high skill migrants is equal or higher than that of the native population.