Hacker News Reader

Comment by wolverine876 | Hacker News Reader

> Burdensome regulations on housing construction have caused costs to skyrocket.

How much have costs increased, and what tells us that it's regulations, not many other causes?

Also, which regulations? Some are more valuable, some less, and inevitably some will misfire. I'm not just going to trust real estate developers, who have their own interests, to meet other needs.

> below-market mandates

I'm not sure we need more high-end development - those tenants have plenty of options.

> community reviews

In cities, new buildings can impact a community for a century. They should have a say, not just a developer from another city.

View on HN

> Also, which regulations?

The entire article is on the prohibition of single stair multi-family residential.

> I'm not sure we need more high-end development - those tenants have plenty of options.

This is silly. When car makers couldn't make enough cars in 2021 and the price went up, was the solution to ban making new cars? Should we have prohibited making cars with fancy trim? Having enough housing for everyone is the only way to make sure affordable housing exists.

Cities have seen plenty of high-end housing built (afaik), and yet there is still a lack of affordable housing.

Building more expensive homes doesn't seem to increase availability of affordable ones. The idea that it would seems to be another 'trickle-down economics' theory, the one from the 1980s that if we help the wealthy get wealthier, the benefits will 'trickle-down' (turns out, only the first step worked). Reasonably, wealthy people don't see poor housing as an option, though there is gentrification.

> When car makers couldn't make enough cars in 2021 and the price went up, was the solution to ban making new cars? Should we have prohibited making cars with fancy trim?

Making expensive cars wouldn't seem to result in many more affordable ones.

> This is silly.

An aggressive assertion that you aren't thinking, and aren't willing to.

You are mistaken, modern housing construction in major cities is far below historical numbers

I've seen plenty of high-end apartments and condos, etc., but that's a small market and therefore low overall quantity.

> Cities have seen plenty of high-end housing built (afaik), and yet there is still a lack of affordable housing.

They permit office space for more workers than bedrooms. A big clue: pandemic aside, commutes get longer every year.

> The idea that it would seems to be another 'trickle-down economics' theory, the one from the 1980s that if we help the wealthy get wealthier, the benefits will 'trickle-down' (turns out, only the first step worked). Reasonably, wealthy people don't see poor housing as an option, though there is gentrification.

I see you're versed in the left-NIMBY lingo. No, 'trickle down economics' was an excuse for the wealthy to pay lower taxes. When fancy new housing is built, the property taxes are higher.

> Making expensive cars wouldn't seem to result in many more affordable ones.

I think you're intentionally missing the point. The price came down when more cars could be manufactured.

Err, I just enumerated many regulations I have a problem with in the very post you quoted, and evidence is pretty strong that it's the combined effect of all of those regulations that results in higher costs. [1] I realized I left off overuse of exclusively single-family zoning, which is the worst offender. [2]

> I'm not sure we need more high-end development - those tenants have plenty of options.

Evidence is strong that market-rate construction causes richer residents to exchange their current unit for a higher-end unit, opening up supply at the lower end. [3]

The problem with BMR requirements is the increased costs borne by developers, who have to offset those increased costs by charging more for the market rate units. There's a limit to that market, so fewer units are constructed than otherwise would be. Middle class families are especially worse off, as they neither qualify for BMR lotteries, nor earn enough for the rapidly accelerating market-rate unit. [4]

Further, rents are lower in states that disallow BMR mandates (like Texas) than those that have BMR mandates (like California).

1. https://www.axios.com/2019/08/28/study-californias-land-use-... 2. https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/05/business/single-family-zoning... 3. https://www.lewis.ucla.edu/research/market-rate-development-... 4. https://escholarship.org/content/qt036599mr/qt036599mr_noSpl...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com