Ask Lemmy

No, unless we separate housing from investment, it will never be affordable. I don't foresee the political will to make it happen.

No, at least not in countries (e.g., the USA) that rely on the state to micromanage every aspect of zoning, and which therefore allow NIMBYs to derail progress at every possible step.

In a better world we would draft new laws to throw out our entire zoning system, and start over with something much more flexible at the state or national level- ideally based on the approach Japan uses, which defaults to mixed-use for every building and makes NIMBYism structurally impossible.

I suspect that a strong push for fully remote work would help the US with housing costs due to a chunk of the workforce moving out of the cities and into the boonies.

No. Expensive housing is a genie in a bottle.

Once sufficient people have purchased a house at the high price, it would be in their interest for prices to remain high. Corporate entities that buy up houses will actively lobby to make sure housing prices stay high, and the average Joe who paid that much for a house will be happy it stays that way.

Not only no, but you better get a burial plot while you can afford it.

I can’t speak to other markets but in California, the housing bubble is in part supported by investment from around the world. Chinese and Russian nouveau rich are buying homes in CA because it’s a safe place to keep their money relative to their other options. They might even just leave them empty and watch them appreciate. It’s disgusting, when people are struggling like hell just to live.

Perhaps the state could regulate this and ban international purchases or empty homes but I highly doubt it since the horse has left the barn decades ago and this would deeply impact many rich people, and those people have influence. It would also tank the home values of many average Americans, which would be deeply unpopular as many of those folks are banking on taking that value with them to Mexico or Ecuador to retire on. So this regulation would be bad for the rich and unpopular at large. It would help the young and the poor, the two chronically underrepresented groups.

So unless we can change the entire world order, I don’t see this wholly going away. Can we make it better? I think so. We need more supply, and it needs to be high density and low cost. Those are not insurmountable. But right now, private developers and the government don’t have what it takes to do anything.

I know someone who works for a low income housing non profit and they manage 8 big apartment buildings that their non profit built or bought and they operate them as homes for low income people. They are funded by philanthropists large and small as well as some public money.

If we could find a way to direct more money to such things, we could make a real impact. Perhaps a wealth tax that goes directly to such housing.

But even then, it’s like MediCal - it will only help those in abject poverty. It wont help my cousin who is making $125k and still can’t afford to buy a home. Middle class will never get help, basically, and this is why you see them moving elsewhere.

Want prices to drop?

Stop buying houses.

Eventually the bubble will burst.

The economy will be shit for a few years. And Eventually things will return to normal.

No. Stop hoping and take the houses instead.

I know parking lot minimums make it hell for new stores to be built, but does it also affect mid- and high-rises? Because that would fucking suck if that’s another reason it’s hard to make affordable housing.