Comment by xyzsparetimexyz
3 days ago
Its not self inflicted. It does have many causes, zoning being one of them, but the reluctance to build a they do in eg China is a problem
3 days ago
Its not self inflicted. It does have many causes, zoning being one of them, but the reluctance to build a they do in eg China is a problem
Reluctance to build makes it a self inflicted problem, no?
It is absolutely self-inflicted. Most major US cities made the choice to massively limit dense housing construction through zoning and permitting in the 70s-80s, and then shifted into complete amnesia mode and/or active denialism about why population numbers were suddenly growing much faster than housing construction rates.
By coincidence the United States isn’t the only country Great Britain, Ireland, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand have the same problem lack of affordability for people between 18 and 35 who can’t afford to buy a house/home.
Notice that all these countries are English speaking countries? Aside from speaking English they also have lots in common when it comes to the way the economy and society is run. I can only speak for the United States, but I’ve noticed unfordable not luxury apartments going up everywhere and starter homes are not.
> Notice that all these countries are English speaking countries?
It looks more like you only read English-language news which is concerned about the happenings in English-speaking countries.
https://www.numbeo.com/property-investment/rankings_by_count...
These are current average houseprice-to-income ratios per country. The first English-speaking country on that list is in 87th rank.
The price to income ratio is influenced more by income than housing prices, because housing prices have a floor in terms of construction materials costs, and then countries in deep poverty are going to have a grisly ratio. For example, Cuba has some of the lowest housing costs in the world, but it's #4 on the list for worst price to income ratio. Nigeria is at #1 because their median income is $825/year rather than because they inhibit housing construction.
The issue is, why does it cost several times as much to add a housing unit in the US as it does in Mexico? That can't be explained by the cost of lumber or copper since they're tradable commodities and if it was labor then prefabricated components should be driving down the price unless it's some kind of a racket. Which implies that it's mainly rackets and zoning restrictions.
The "average" is "median", correct?
I suppose the message is that although housing (and health care and higher education) costs in the US (and elsewhere) have outpaced wage growth for the last half century or so, it could still be worse living in a country with much lower wages to begin with.