• Xenforo Cloud has scheduled an upgrade to XenForo version 2.2.16. This will take place on or shortly after the following date and time: Jul 05, 2024 at 05:00 PM (PT) There shouldn't be any downtime, as it's just a maintenance release. More info here

Someone Explain This So Called Housing Crisis?

I wonder how Airbnb contribute to the problem. Plenty of owners in Montréal find ways to evict tenants, then they renovate the building and go the Airbnb way. The city put certain rules in place, but they have proven to be easy to circumvent.
 
There is no "the issue".

We know for a fact that price fixing is an issue.
How do we know that for a fact?
Supply is an issue.

Corporate competition

Comodificaiton of mortgages

An entrenched upper-middle-class with financial incentives to protect the status quo. And zoning determined by local politicians most accountable to existing home owners.
The only parts here that seem obvious to me is the supply problem which is caused by existing homeowners blocking new supply through zoning laws and other mechanisms like environmental impact statements.

Idk what you mean when you talk about commodification of mortgages and corporate competition, how is that affecting prices here?
There wasnt argument that adding more supply doesn't lower prices. The contention is that the idea that the US housing problem is solely an issue of lack of supply is not true.

I'm not sure if you've tried to rent anytime recently but we are moving within the next month and have looked at rentals around here, the economic gatekeeping is absurd. We looked at s place yesterday that had a $300 key fee. Places are charging $50 a month "pet rent"...like our dog has a paying job. Oh and pet deposits are increasingly non-refundable. None of this sh*t was present when I first starting living on my own in the 90's. No one was charging for a key. There's also rental requirement that disqualify people with housing vouchers. So even if you get assistance from the Government, property owners can tell you to get f*cked.
All that stuff sucks but I would imagine the primary barrier for most folks is the monthly rent itself and not the fees. If we had all those fees but saw rent prices go down as they have in cities that radically rezoned their land like Austin Texas and Auckland New Zealand idk that they'd be that much of an issue in and of themselves.
it's not true because banking is also tied into housing

here is one of the core components of the article:

"From 2000 to 2010 the U.S. had a surplus of 4.6 million housing units, while in the following decade there was a shortage of 1.3 million fewer units than population growth would demand. All combined, that nets out to a surplus of 3.3 million homes from 2000 to 2020."

the numbers in the 2000's had horrible banking practices, essentially DEI of mortgages, which lead to the ballooning of prices.... did we really have a surplus? curiously, 2010 was added into that timeframe, the market had already crashed and bottomed at that point, stats and lies and all that.

anecdotally, housing is a bit of a lost cause without ample mult family units. Any and EVERYTIME I see a building being built, it's luxury homes with luxury prices. That goes for 20 years ago when KB was still building mcmansions, to now, still building mcmansions, this is just how it is all throughout the world as living standards increase.

the argument that the article makes is that we have the supply, but not enough for the given income, and it's a weird twist on the subject, and it's not totally wrong, we are lacking supply of affordable housing
If we want more "affordable" housing(don't really like the framing of affordable/luxury tbh) then we need to lower the barrier to entry. All the cheapest units in my area are efficiencies rented out by the resident homeowner. Americans don't like the idea of their neighbors building accessory dwelling units but if they had the freedom to I'm sure many Americans would want one for themselves if it wasn't much of a hassle and meant an extra revenue stream. Right now we empower the busybody neighbor over the homeowner but if you turn that on its head I think we'd see more affordable ADUs on the market.
 
The solution is to move this to the WR and hear how living in people’s backyards in shacks is the answer
And also how having a McDonald's in the middle of subdivision is a really good plan too!! And what a c*** you are if you don't want that in your neighborhood, increasing crime. You're also probably a racist in some magical way if you disagree with these policies.
 
And also how having a McDonald's in the middle of subdivision is a really good plan too!! And what a c*** you are if you don't want that in your neighborhood, increasing crime. You're also probably a racist in some magical way if you disagree with these policies.
Why shouldn't your neighbor be allowed to open a café in their garage? How would having an eatery within walking distance of a residential neighborhood increase crime?
 
I wonder how Airbnb contribute to the problem. Plenty of owners in Montréal find ways to evict tenants, then they renovate the building and go the Airbnb way. The city put certain rules in place, but they have proven to be easy to circumvent.
I wouldn't be surprised if it factored in on some level but I also think that people want a scapegoat and short term rentals(STRs) are an easy one to point to.
 
Why shouldn't your neighbor be allowed to open a café in their garage? How would having an eatery within walking distance of a residential neighborhood increase crime?
That’s not what you were arguing for. You were arguing for eliminating zoning between residential and commercial.
 
That’s not what you were arguing for. You were arguing for eliminating zoning between residential and commercial.
I was arguing for mixed use developments yes.

Why is that wrong? Why should you be able to supersede your neighbor's property rights to impose your vision of the good life on others?
 
I was arguing for mixed use developments yes.

Why is that wrong? Why should you be able to supersede your neighbor's property rights to impose your vision of the good life on others?
BRB going to open a 24 hour machinist shop right next door to your house. On the other side I was thinking a chemical plant.
 
Why shouldn't your neighbor be allowed to open a café in their garage? How would having an eatery within walking distance of a residential neighborhood increase crime?
I heard explained why and you pretended none of my points mattered because you're stuck on this weird ideas sticking a McDonald's in my neighborhood.
 
Is that what I was arguing for? Try to be honest now.
Yes. It is.

If communities want more mixed use, they can have it. If communities want less mixed use, they can have that too.

I have no issue with mixed use. I have issue with only mixed use. Eliminating options is authoritarian.
 
I heard explained why and you pretended none of my points mattered because you're stuck on this weird ideas sticking a McDonald's in my neighborhood.
At one point someone argued having more car traffic in a neighborhood was safer for kids playing outside.
 
Why shouldn't your neighbor be allowed to open a café in their garage? How would having an eatery within walking distance of a residential neighborhood increase crime?
And also when I wanted to get into the weeds and details with you, you backed out of the conversation. So why are you starting it up again now? How about we just start where we left off? Explain exactly what you mean by a neighborhood and exactly what you mean by businesses and show me some pictures of the kinds of neighborhoods you're talking about.

Otherwise, there arent enough specifics from your position in order to defend it or explain it or refute it.
 
And also when I wanted to get into the weeds and details with you, you backed out of the conversation. So why are you starting it up again now? How about we just start where we left off? Explain exactly what you mean by a neighborhood and exactly what you mean by businesses and show me some pictures of the kinds of neighborhoods you're talking about.

Otherwise, there arent enough specifics from your position in order to defend it or explain it or refute it.
The issue is if he wants mixed use that refuses some kinds of businesses it means he has limits and he’s just arguing that his limits are more appropriate than ours.
 
I heard explained why and you pretended none of my points mattered because you're stuck on this weird ideas sticking a McDonald's in my neighborhood.
Why is it weird to want to have certain commercial establishments like cafés, diners, grocers, and pharmacies within a residential neighborhood?
Yes. It is.
No it wasn't, in fact I've said the opposite
I didn't say we should get rid of all zoning laws, of course we need some euclidean zoning laws and don't need industrial plants popping up in residential neighborhoods. But there's no need to zone so much land for single family zoning, its actually bad for the municipalities since it doesn't generate dense enough tax bases to generate sufficient revenue to pay for the maintenance cost of these suburbs. Hence cities should incentivize the building of mixed use, multi-family developments via tax breaks.
I don't know how you can say you care abut property rights while advocating for highly restrictive regulations around what people can do with their property. Of course we need some zoning so that industrial plants and strip clubs don't pop up in residential neighborhoods but he's talking about regulations that go, far, far beyond that.
Why can't you just be honest here and address what I'm actually arguing? Why is it wrong to have small scale, low impact, homeowner run businesses? Again, not talking chemical plants and strip clubs but cafés, diners, bookstores and the like.
And also when I wanted to get into the weeds and details with you, you backed out of the conversation. So why are you starting it up again now? How about we just start where we left off? Explain exactly what you mean by a neighborhood and exactly what you mean by businesses and show me some pictures of the kinds of neighborhoods you're talking about.

Otherwise, there arent enough specifics from your position in order to defend it or explain it or refute it.
I didn't back out, I gave you a reasonable response which is that of course I can't give you some extremely detailed plan of what this would look like in part because part of the problem with modern urban planning is the need to meticulously plan every detail instead of allowing organic order to emerge. For the record here's that post again.
I've mentioned some of these details, specifically that the focus should be on small retail and restaurants. Asking me about color scheme and hours of operation is silly though, try to be serious here. Those things are going to vary wildly based on a whole host of factors.

If you're genuinely curious then here's an article that goes over some of what I've hinted at here
The issue is if he wants mixed use that refuses some kinds of businesses it means he has limits and he’s just arguing that his limits are more appropriate than ours.
Yes banning chemical plants from residential neighborhoods is reasonable in a way that banning duplexes and cafes is not. The weird position is acting like those two things have the same kind of impact. There's a reason you don't see chemical plants in the middle of a strip mall where you might see a café.
 
Why is it weird to want to have certain commercial establishments like cafés, diners, grocers, and pharmacies within a residential neighborhood?

No it wasn't, in fact I've said the opposite


Why can't you just be honest here and address what I'm actually arguing? Why is it wrong to have small scale, low impact, homeowner run businesses? Again, not talking chemical plants and strip clubs but cafés, diners, bookstores and the like.

I didn't back out, I gave you a reasonable response which is that of course I can't give you some extremely detailed plan of what this would look like in part because part of the problem with modern urban planning is the need to meticulously plan every detail instead of allowing organic order to emerge. For the record here's that post again.


Yes banning chemical plants from residential neighborhoods is reasonable in a way that banning duplexes and cafes is not. The weird position is acting like those two things have the same kind of impact. There's a reason you don't see chemical plants in the middle of a strip mall where you might see a café.
You realize no one wants what you’re arguing for?
 
Considering this thread feels like ancient history I didn’t remember you had limits on chemical factories.
 
Back
Top