Hacker News Reader

Comment by 0_____0 | Hacker News Reader

I am beyond overjoyed that a city somewhere (Austin) did the stupid simple thing and simply added a bunch of housing when prices went up. You can clearly see the graphs, where after 2020, prices shoot up, then housing starts shoot up, then prices drop back down to 2020 levels.

I would say I am progressive politically but the ostensibly progressive mindset that led to denying that housing supply could help with the cost of housing has been crazy harmful. Even with the newfound acknowledgement that housing production is necessary, it's going to be harder and more expensive to catch up - peakier demand for trades labor and materials also drives up prices!!

View on HN

This is a really simplistic view. It’s not just policy. In Texas, the vast majority of land is privately owned (only 2% is public land), so zoning is the only thing preventing buildout. Most of the geography is flat, there are huge expanses of empty fields all around Austin, and the weather is buildable nearly year round. There is also a tremendous amount of cheap labor due to the proximity to Mexico and the lack of minimum wages / border policy enforcement / etc. there are so many factors that make Texas cheap to build in that aren’t true universally in America.

Another key point, look up net migration in Austin. During the pandemic and remote work, everyone and their brother wanted to move to Austin, it was super trendy and a lot of tech was moving there. Look it up now. In Q4 2023 not only did grow to slow but it reversed to net outflow. Thats a massive difference in demand for housing and a massive difference in supply of housing. [1]

Yes, more homes got built, but there were many other factors at play than something simple like “let them build houses”.

1. https://www.redfin.com/news/housing-migration-trends-q3-2023...

> empty fields all around Austin

True but also doesn't explain the Austin housing market. Austin added more new apartments just east of downtown in 5 years than San Francisco built in the entire 1990s. The differences between pro-housing and deeply anti-housing local attitudes do not come down to geography.

Local attitudes matter less when there's less restrictive zoning and regulations, for better and worse.

Thank you for the nuance! I suspected that it was much easier to actually get the housing built but wasn't clear on the migration flows.

Either way it seems like housing prices started to decline spring 2022, about 1 year after the massive spike in building permits started in earnest.

There are a lot of impediments to doing the same thing in say, the Northeast, where I am. Labor is insanely expensive. This land has been occupied by city for hundreds of years, and greenfield does not exist nearby, nor is there the appetite to Ctrl C Ctrl V build massive subdivisions, especially out of reach of transit here.

Austin proves a relationship between supply and housing prices, but it will always be incumbent upon cities and states to pave the way for massive construction of housing in times of need. I think that long term, that means working to develop the labor pool and participation in the trades, streamlining permitting and inspection (I just finished a gut reno and this was a fucking nightmare), and yes, changing zoning so the mass housing projects actually can get built.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com