How Tokyo built its way to abundant housing • Hacker News Board

Re: How Tokyo built its way to abundant housing

#71

Post by knuththetruth » Mon, Apr 02, 2018, 2:00 PM UTC

rb808 wrote: post #58

dalbasal wrote: post #2

I think it's worth occasionally thinking of the "economy" in simple terms, especially for the wider middle class. There are relatively few broad categories that make up most of our economic lives. For most people the "economy" mostly consists of (0) their job/income (1) food/consumable (2) stuff/durables (3) transport (4) vital services: health, education, etc. (5) housing. 1 & 2 are well served by free markets, and…

Its important to think about what the problem really is. Right now many people are moving to the big cities, and the big cities have expensive housing. To me the real problem is why people want to live in a handful of big cities instead of cheaper regions. If its true that there is no choice but to live in big cities then the current high prices really aren't a problem, its just that is where the money is. Manhattan…

But, in relation to Japan, the same holds true. Most people move towards a few urban areas for jobs. And they build housing for them.

The difference in America are the inequities between the wealthy and everyone else. The belief that it’s somehow just or moral to arrange society this way, to build entire cities that can’t function without the labor of poor people, but where they can’t afford to live or easily commute into on public transportation. That these aren’t problems that we should collectively solve, but just another disparity from which the rich can profit.

Re: How Tokyo built its way to abundant housing

#72

Post by rocqua » Mon, Apr 02, 2018, 2:07 PM UTC

infinite8s wrote: post #52

rocqua wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note: 400 square feet is ~37 square Meters. I happen to write this from a 24 square meter (~260 square foot) apartment, I am very happy with.

I presume you have no one else living with you. That's a very small space to raise a family.

Indeed, and a large part of loving it comes from the low rent. For a student in the city though, it is great to not have roommates and still be able to afford rent.

Re: How Tokyo built its way to abundant housing

#73

Post by darksaints » Mon, Apr 02, 2018, 2:18 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #70

macspoofing wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Housing is in many places (mostly successful cities) the economic disaster. Fully exposed to financialization, business cycles, inflation prone. Rather than signalling to supply, prices adjust to whatever the median person can afford to pay Why should housing not be to governed by market forces? Housing shortages are due to regulations, from limiting new development outright, to limiting high density buildings, to h…

> Why should housing not be to governed by market forces? The limit is transportation/infrastructure. not buildings. You need NYC's roads, schools, and subway etc before block after block of 40+ floor building are viable. It'a very much a tragedy of the commons situation as a single high rise is fine but 100 of them are not. Unfortunately, most areas are regulated at the local level which while better than a free for…

Nobody needs, or can even afford for that matter, infrastructure for people that don't exist yet. That's why that process never works. It is nothing more than a giant concern troll: you get to look like the smart one who insists on planning ahead for more development, knowing full well that nobody will seriously propose adding more infrastructure for people that don't exist yet.

Luckily, you can build infrastructure as it's needed. If traffic gets bad because 100k people moved in and it's straining the transit system, you've got an additional 100k people who will help pay for it. We've been doing it this way for thousands of years, so it's pretty hard to argue that it doesn't work.

Re: How Tokyo built its way to abundant housing

#74

Post by kofejnik » Mon, Apr 02, 2018, 2:18 PM UTC

zeth___ wrote: post #47

macspoofing wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Housing is in many places (mostly successful cities) the economic disaster. Fully exposed to financialization, business cycles, inflation prone. Rather than signalling to supply, prices adjust to whatever the median person can afford to pay Why should housing not be to governed by market forces? Housing shortages are due to regulations, from limiting new development outright, to limiting high density buildings, to h…

>Soviet housing never worked. More to the point the wait lists for apartments was measured in years (ripe for corruption). The buildings were shoddy and depressing (hope you like grey). Urban planning was haphazard and may or not may have corresponded to where people actually wanted to live. And yet there was no homelessness in the USSR. If that's a system that doesn't work, sign me up for two.

> And yet there was no homelessness in the USSR.

Just stop, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Source: grew up in USSR, 4 people in a 10 sqm room.

Re: How Tokyo built its way to abundant housing

#75

Post by Retric » Mon, Apr 02, 2018, 2:22 PM UTC

darksaints wrote: post #73

Retric wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why should housing not be to governed by market forces? The limit is transportation/infrastructure. not buildings. You need NYC's roads, schools, and subway etc before block after block of 40+ floor building are viable. It'a very much a tragedy of the commons situation as a single high rise is fine but 100 of them are not. Unfortunately, most areas are regulated at the local level which while better than a free for…

Nobody needs, or can even afford for that matter, infrastructure for people that don't exist yet. That's why that process never works. It is nothing more than a giant concern troll: you get to look like the smart one who insists on planning ahead for more development, knowing full well that nobody will seriously propose adding more infrastructure for people that don't exist yet. Luckily, you can build infrastructure…

It's a question of collecting money not building infrastructure.

When 100k people move in and you need a new water treatment plant. Those 100k people should pay for the water treatment plant not everyone that lives in the area who also paid for the last water treatment plant.

Further, you need to start building infrastructure now, not in 20 years when the new people have paid enough in taxes to pay for it. It's not like you need a new police station and a new school from a single new home but you do need them after X new homes.

Debt seems like the obvious solution to time shifting infrastructure, but that increases costs, adds risks, and still forces everyone to pay for new infrastructure. When a tiny home is worth 3x what would be somewhere else that value is from the existing infrastructure not the cost of building the house so adding a tax to capture that surplus is completely reasonable.

Re: How Tokyo built its way to abundant housing

#76

Post by raldi » Mon, Apr 02, 2018, 2:23 PM UTC

mabbo wrote: post #5

The true essence of the article: > Japan has a relatively simple and unambiguous zoning code, one which the national government has repeatedly adjusted in order to allow for more housing growth in Tokyo. That has been done in the face of opposition at neighbourhood and even city level, opposition that in countries which have devolved land use decisions to a local level would be enough to stop densification or at leas…

We’re working on it in California this year, but the bill is about to go through some very difficult committees. Details here: https://yimbyaction.org/supportsb827/

Calling your state senator to leave a message of support takes just 30 seconds. Emailing them takes just one paragraph. In both cases, they don’t usually get much constituent feedback, so you really can make a difference.

The link above makes it easy.

Re: How Tokyo built its way to abundant housing

#77

Post by jdavis703 » Mon, Apr 02, 2018, 2:24 PM UTC

FreakyT wrote: post #37

maxerickson wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The planning commission in my small town recently blocked a $10 million apartment building that would have mostly been cheaper housing. Some directly stated that they didn't want the poor people living in the area, which is stupid because they already live there (demographically it's already the poorest zone in the county). A few others said they didn't want to disturb the historical character of the shabby, decades…

> The real reason is that they don't consider reducing housing prices a good outcome. I think this is the key. If you're a property owner, any outcome that reduces the value of your property is naturally a negative outcome. A rational economic actor, in that case, would always oppose anything that would reduce housing costs. It's a tough problem to combat, because what can be done? Barring property owners from partic…

Well you could add a conflict of interest clause. If the thing you're testifying on impacts the property value of your home then you must state that up front. Further, such rational economic thinking isn't really that rational. For example next to my home is a tent encampment. That certaintly doesn't increase property values and could easily be fixed by say building some affordable micro-apartments on that plot of land.

Re: How Tokyo built its way to abundant housing

#78

Post by kofejnik » Mon, Apr 02, 2018, 2:24 PM UTC

simonbarker87 wrote: post #49

zeth___ wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Soviet housing never worked. More to the point the wait lists for apartments was measured in years (ripe for corruption). The buildings were shoddy and depressing (hope you like grey). Urban planning was haphazard and may or not may have corresponded to where people actually wanted to live. And yet there was no homelessness in the USSR. If that's a system that doesn't work, sign me up for two.

Wasn’t the lack of homelessness and unemployment because both of those were designated as a crime and so you got sent of to a work camp?

More or less so. Plus, you also could not just decide to go to Moscow (or other city), you needed "propiska" (residence permit). And those born in countryside didn't have passports until _1974_ so had no freedom of movement at all.

Seriously, I cannot find polite words for people praising USSR

Re: How Tokyo built its way to abundant housing

#79

Post by conanbatt » Mon, Apr 02, 2018, 2:27 PM UTC

dalbasal wrote: post #2

I think it's worth occasionally thinking of the "economy" in simple terms, especially for the wider middle class. There are relatively few broad categories that make up most of our economic lives. For most people the "economy" mostly consists of (0) their job/income (1) food/consumable (2) stuff/durables (3) transport (4) vital services: health, education, etc. (5) housing. 1 & 2 are well served by free markets, and…

Every market has its own peculiarities, and housing much like anything benefits enormously from behaving like a free one.

The two single most important factors that make housing not behave efficiently as a market are zoning and taxation.

Zoning because it puts limits on what can be built, which means the process to expand is now bureaucratic. The original article talks about how in tokyo zoning hasnt been a problem for the market as the championing difference.

Taxation is the second one. No matter how much you build, the people and the space require considerable resources to manage: sewage, garbage, public transportation, local courts ,etc. If you tax income, the more people you cram, and the more the expenditure of the government is, the more oppressive becomes rent. That is because as a dweller, you pay taxes that go to services that increase your rent. This great injustice is described in the book "Poverty and Progress" by henry george in the 1900's in california, where the concept of Land Value Tax was created and then validated by economists on the left (Krugman) and the right (Milton Friedman).

You would not see any problems with local neighbors in San Francisco if instead of state income taxes and sales taxes they moved that to land value taxes, and suddenly the guy with the picturesque 1920 house for himself will find that his taxes look like a monthly rent.

The biggest problems of housing, much like the biggest problems on almost any market, come from the government, not for the peculiarities of the market itself.

Re: How Tokyo built its way to abundant housing

#80

Post by conanbatt » Mon, Apr 02, 2018, 2:29 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #70

macspoofing wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Housing is in many places (mostly successful cities) the economic disaster. Fully exposed to financialization, business cycles, inflation prone. Rather than signalling to supply, prices adjust to whatever the median person can afford to pay Why should housing not be to governed by market forces? Housing shortages are due to regulations, from limiting new development outright, to limiting high density buildings, to h…

> Why should housing not be to governed by market forces? The limit is transportation/infrastructure. not buildings. You need NYC's roads, schools, and subway etc before block after block of 40+ floor building are viable. It'a very much a tragedy of the commons situation as a single high rise is fine but 100 of them are not. Unfortunately, most areas are regulated at the local level which while better than a free for…

> I would posit that the best solution is state level control + an infrastructure tax on new development. Charging ~30k per SFH might seem to make things more expensive but by allowing new entry to pay their own way let market forces work while adjusting for externalities.

Why should the new pay the burden of the new and the old together?