Tldr; there's a housing shortage because... there are not enough houses being built
and they're too lucrative to make them affordable.
My question is, who's buying all the homes up? I mean we know the answer.
Investors, and not just mega corporations, local investors are a major issue.
We have collectively come to understand the idea that you can get free money by buying houses and renting them out. If you talk to any lay person and ask them how they'd spend a million dollars the most common answer seems to be "buy property"
Our issue is in our collective minds, but the inertia of the idea means it will probably never be fixed unless there's a catastrophe
Which is a silly conclusion... What's the point? The better question would be why isn't more housing being built? And I suspect the answer to that question is there is a vested interest in increasing that deficit.
Whenever someone starts to conclude that housing is so expensive purely because there aren't enough homes, they often follow that up with pointing to construction costs. Which to me screams deregulation and wage complaints, two things an improving society should not be encouraging.
I'm the only person on my street actually in favor of the proposed multi-use housing/shopping complex a developer wants to build a block over from us. I can't change the minds of all these old people. I'm pretty sure we're just fucked until they all move out or pass on.
I heard some pushback on a plan for a mixed use development in an abandoned office park. The person had zero to do with the property, lived in a completely different area. But didn't want it because "traffic". Like pushing those potential residents to live further away was somehow more beneficial for traffic than putting them close to it.
We can just start our own municipalities somewhere. Where is the biggest question
With blackjack and hookers!
In fairness to your neighbours, it's probably hard to be on board when all they probably foresee is increased traffic and reduced property values.
Mixed use land developments increase property values. My neighbors believe urban myths and lies, so I'm not particularly inclined to be any more fair to them than I would be to someone who believes that vaccines cause autism.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-02/does-affordable-housing-lower-property-values
I own a house here too, ya know. I don't share their misguided concerns. Yes there will be traffic. I believe we have reasonable options to mitigate that.
But it looks like the rich, old NIMBYs are going to win this fight, and keep people locked out as always.
Oh for sure, they're mostly misguided, but not usually malicious. When housing is such a big investment people tend to behave very conservatively which means it's lots of work to shift the needle...
I’m pretty sure we’re just fucked until they all move out or pass on.
Most young people that support multi-use housing today will stop supporting it by the time they retire. It's not the today's old people that are against everything, it's all old people. The next generation will not be different.
Lol, I'm not young. I'm pushing 50.
Why are you in favor of it? They wanted to build one near me, and I think it would bring more people and more traffic into an otherwise quiet neighborhood. I think it would also take away part of the exclusivity of the neighborhood, and lower property values (or otherwise make them grow more slowly)
So you're okay with the concept elsewhere just not in your backyard?
I’m ok with prisons and dumps and volcanoes existing, but I’d rather not live next to them.
Define NIMBY.
Multi use land developments increase property values, and I would love to have some shops that I can walk to. Fuck suburbs. Fuck excluding people. I want housing density and actually walkable neighborhoods. YIMBY. Thanks.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-02/does-affordable-housing-lower-property-values
"Could they build it? Yes. Will they build it? No," Gardner said, citing steep construction costs”
Aaaand let’s wrap this up, that’s all she wrote
More like citing lower than 45°+ angle profits.
Also all the vacant housing. But mentioning that might make some real estate owners nervous.
I’m all for building new homes, but just posting data from Hines is pretty lazy journalism.
Planet Money had a good episode going into three of the reasons (boomers aging in place, zoning laws, and losing people/expertise in home building industries) https://www.npr.org/2021/07/30/1022827659/three-reasons-for-the-housing-shortage#:~:text=Today%20on%20the%20show%2C%20we,know%20how%20to%20build%20houses.
The problem is insufficient negative consequences for housing hoarders due to state protection.
Data: Hines analysis of Census Bureau and Moody's data; Note: Population demand is a theoretical housing demand metric based on long-term household formation and homeownership rates by age cohort; Chart: Axios Visuals
very scientific
If it's a common method used and has shown to be accurate then being consistent in your metric outweighs some flaws.
I don't like artificial metrics constructed from other metrics without any explanation.
Your lack of knowledge on a subject doesn’t mean it isn’t adequately explained elsewhere to the extent that it is rudimentary for most people.
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.