Duh? Cost of living here is spiraling out of control and housing is the biggest line item. But it's going to take something big and heavy (like federal intervention) to fix it.
[https://www.redfin.com/state/California/housing-market]
When the line keeps going up and to the right, everyone builds that into their spreadsheets and times are good.
When the line starts going down and to the right, they hope it’s temporary. But after awhile, they need to update their spreadsheets - and then times are bad.
As long as the fed keeps rates high, the crash is inevitable. I give it another year or two.
Bankruptcies are likely to be incredibly painful.
The market also does seem strangely stubborn to correct.
We’ll see when things change, but for now they’re not freeing up cash. And the housing market in particular’s momentum has been steadily changing.
https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep...
"The recent industrial development of the City of Cleveland, following the railroad lines, has already reached the Village and to some extent extends over into it. In its obvious course, this industrial expansion will soon absorb the area in the Village for industrial enterprises. It is in restraint of this prospect that the ordinance seeks to operate. In effect it erects a dam to hold back the flood of industrial development and thus to preserve a rural character in portions of the Village which, under the operation of natural economic laws, would be devoted most profitably to industrial undertakings. This, the evidence shows, destroys value without compensation to the owners of lands who have acquired and are holding them for industrial uses."
"...the ordinance of its own force operates greatly to reduce the value of appellee's lands and destroy their marketability for industrial, commercial and residential uses; and the attack is directed, not against any specific provision or provisions, but against the ordinance as an entirety."
Congress really can’t (the existing federal judiciary would be more likely to find any federal legislative attempt to limit local zoning a violation of the 10th Amendment than to give it effect); SCOTUS could, either directly or collaterally, but it seems unlikely (for one thing, to even make it to the merits you’d probably need someone who took ownership when the property wasn’t subject to zoning restrictions and where a claim wouldn’t be time-barred given the length of time since the zoning rule was enacted; its not 1922 anymore, and the problem isn’t new zoning.)
Congress could propose an amendment to overturn it – or to more directly limit zoning – but it would take a supermajority of states to sign on to give it effect, and if you had that, well, you’d probably have a supermajority of states limiting zoning without federal intervention, too.
All that's necessary is for the government to get out of the way. i.e. dramatically reduce zoning and permitting requirements.
Remember there's a limit to how many of those can be sold. Once you've sold them all they'll build sometime else
But only if the government lets.