Social WR Lounge v252: Move to C T Pa Town?

[Deleted member 405583]

Imagine taking the time to put 100+ posters on ignore. On a karate forum.

Imagine being one of those 100

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Did you read your link? Housing costs are being driven up by a strong economy, a desirable location, and (and this is key) low inventory.

No shit. Must be why I posted it as evidence that supply is not keeping up with demand.

 

[My Spot]

Imagine being one of those 100

Now imagine that there's a better chance that Jack will stop ignoring posters on a karate forum than the Cubs ever beating the Marlins in the playoffs. LMAO!!!

 

[Sara]

Imagine taking the time to put 100+ posters on ignore. On a karate forum.

And saying someone else was mad or taking it too serious.

 

[Islam Imamate]

One thing to consider when it comes to the pricing of new housing is that excessive regulations increase the time it takes to build new housing which adds to its cost. Not only that but it can add labor costs. I've known cases where experienced contractors are paid to navigate the bureaucracy at the city, that's how annoying it can be.

That said on the free market side I think the effects of short term rentals have to be acknowledged. It hasn't been studied for long since it as relatively recent phenomenon but there are some studies that suggest it increases housing costs and it does so without providing housing to local residents.

So we definitely need to cut a lot of red tape and make it easier to add supply but there are legitimate concerns with how some of that supply gets snatched up by opportunistic landlords who maximize their profits at the expense of the city at large.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

It’s a primary college preparatory school which includes the study of Hawaiian culture and language.

It was founded back in the 1800s by the great granddaughter of King Kamehameha I in order to advance the well-being of Native Hawaiians by providing high quality educational opportunities. It’s by far the best school opportunity out here without having to pay like college tuition prices for private school. And it’s tough to get into.

 

[My Spot]

And saying someone else was mad or taking it too serious.

I remember when we were pals before he started ignoring me in Nov 2016. In one of the countless Jones vs Fedor threads I said Jones would win and that triggered Jack into saying "You're the worst poster here and stink up the joint. How are you not banned?!"

 

[Tycho- Taylor's Version]

Then what's Jack's point? Greg ain't arguing economics. He's saying what's happening in his area.

He's literally arguing about the production and distribution of goods lol.

What's gonna happen when there's a surge in new home construction because thousands of developers suddenly decide there's money to be made in affordable housing? The prices of raw materials and labor rise, all other things being equal. Do you have any idea what sort of profit margins developers tend to operate on? I don't. My guess is that with rise in costs there'll be a rise in price. And my understanding is these costs are already high. Then there's land and its location relative to jobs. Time is money and transportation ain't free.

Geez if only there was some way we could somehow influence the supply of *checks notes* bricks, wood, and steel.

Two sides of the equation, people.

And like I said in a prior post, who wants property values to shrink beside people who don't own any? Shit, even the governments down like that since it fucks their budget. But they can offset that with the extra taxes on the newly built homes. So maybe they can subsidize since everyone else is in business to make money.

This is a genuine issue, but actually puts you on the same side as @Jack V Savage (excuse me for putting words in your mouth but pretty sure I'm right) vs. NIMBYs and zoning laws. Housing is the primary vehicle of wealth accumulation for the middle class in America (and Canada - god, so much in Canada), so overhauling/socializing the market probably isn't as politically viable as just adding to it.

I guess. It's just that people are seeing new construction not being enough to offset new demand, and thinking that new construction is *driving* demand.

Yea lol, that's a whole other thing. Suppliers are a common target when people don't like the price of something, as if they set the price.

But that bypasses the understanding of supply and demand we maybe took for granted earlier.

But does more construction actually prevent them getting priced out of that specific area? The added construction that is actually affordable could be built in a different part of town and the residents get priced out anyway.

I think that's the key part of the disagreement here, many people are skeptical that developers will want to build affordable housing and will instead prefer to build luxury housing. I would imagine that to some extent its kind of a folk belief that has some truth to it but is often exaggerated.

Jack covered this already, but the simple point is that if the developers are building expensive homes it's because that's the point where supply is meeting demand. @Gregolian is upset that his demand is not being met, but that's different from the aggregate demand. Something happening in aggregate doesn't mean it's also happening to each unit of the aggregate (fallacy of division).

If the supply can overcome that demand, the price falls and Greg's needs are met. Now that might be near impossible for practical reasons - maybe something runs out or there just isn't enough space or the timeline for that price movement is beyond Greg's lifetime - but no one's made a case for any of those itt (despite being prompted repeatedly).

I don't know much about construction so I'd actually appreciate a little more insight there. I was under the impression that America could hold a billion people *wink* @PolishHeadlock2. But the insight should also not contravene economics 101.

I wonder if the fundamental problem here is economic inequality in the sense that when new housing supply is generated, its those who are upper class, who already own homes, who are better able to buy up the houses either as investments or if they're really rich then as a second or third home. So when demand is driven by investors or buyers looking for a summer home more than first time buyers then the latter get priced out by the former.

If so then I don't think housing policy is itself is the solution, the solution would be to reduce economic inequality so there isn't as much of an imbalance between elites and the masses in terms of purchasing power in real estate.

That's very possible. But "reduce income inequality" sounds a lot more pie-in-the-sky to me than "build more houses" and I'd want to see adequate evidence that the latter doesn't work before shifting priority to the former.

In terms of the best policy to control that kind of wealth influx - I know of taxes on foreign real estate investment and subsidies for first-time homebuyers, but couldn't tell you how effective those are. But note that any effect that increased supply does have on mitigating soaring prices also reduces the return on investment.

@Tycho Brah disagrees.

I mean, yea. But I don't see "reduce income inequality" as a proximate solution to almost any problem. It's a systemic problem you work on while fixing everything else you can in the meantime.

 

[Islam Imamate]

My girl Lindsay Ellis got cancelled recently for noting similar plots. She posted a movie sized video talking about it, pretty interesting to hear someone whose career largely revolves around being aware address "cancel culture". Thought about making a thread on it, but I'm not sure I should with how long the video is. I think both sides can find some interesting takes from it.

Yeah I heard about that, in another thread about how some leftists will dogpile each other for the most minor of offenses and I had her case in mind.

By the way, I literally just typed Toll Brothers and within a few seconds got an email from Toll Brothers. Hadn’t even posted the reply yet. We are all doomed.

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

I stay central Maui. The Maui campus is in Pukalani.

Kihei, Makena beach = beautiful.

 

[Gutter Chris]

Im guessing this is a midwest thing cuz my older brother kicked my ass cuz I did the same thing in my moms dodge minivan

I think the heat plus humidity makes the scent bond to things when you bake it in a parking lot

 

[Jack V Savage]

No shit. Must be why I posted it as evidence that supply is not keeping up with demand.

And that means the solution is what? Maybe allow more supply, as I've been saying from the start?

 

[Gutter Chris]

Hogan drew a 3.5 buyrate on PPV 9x. HBK did it...once, maybe?

And ?

The backstreet boys moved a Lotta albums ? Does that make them agoat tier musical act ?

 

[My Spot]

And ?

The backstreet boys moved a Lotta albums ? Does that make them agoat tier musical act ?

Except the Backstreet Boys aren't even close in terms of album sales to the GOATs like Elvis, the Beatles, Michael Jackson, etc.

 

[Gutter Chris]

Except the Backstreet Boys aren't even close in terms of album sales to the GOATs like Elvis, the Beatles, Michael Jackson, etc.

That wasn't really my point troll style

My point is how much something sold has no bearing on weather I think something is awesome or not.

 

[Tycho- Taylor's Version]

The WR leveled up to housing policy. Don’t recall ever seeing people even say NIMBY here ever before the last month or so.

Hey fuck you it's been in tweets that have been embedded.

If we were any good at this there'd be a lot more charts itt. I miss those days (and also the Creationism stuff Jack mentioned last thread).

 

[Islam Imamate]

Jack covered this already, but the simple point is that if the developers are building expensive homes it's because that's the point where supply is meeting demand. @Gregolian is upset that his demand is not being met, but that's different from the aggregate demand. Something happening in aggregate doesn't mean it's also happening to each unit of the aggregate (fallacy of division).

If the supply can overcome that demand, the price falls and Greg's needs are met. Now that might be near impossible for practical reasons - maybe something runs out or there just isn't enough space or the timeline for that price movement is beyond Greg's lifetime - but no one's made a case for any of those itt (despite being prompted repeatedly).

I don't know much about construction so I'd actually appreciate a little more insight there. I was under the impression that America could hold a billion people *wink* @PolishHeadlock2. But the insight should also not contravene economics 101.

I think I did make that point somewhere , that while added housing will almost certainly reduce housing costs the timeline isn't something that inspires confidence in first time homebuyers like Greg.

That's very possible. But "reduce income inequality" sounds a lot more pie-in-the-sky to me than "build more houses" and I'd want to see adequate evidence that the latter doesn't work before shifting priority to the former.

In terms of the best policy to control that kind of wealth influx - I know of taxes on foreign real estate investment and subsidies for first-time homebuyers, but couldn't tell you how effective those are. But note that any effect that increased supply does have on mitigating soaring prices also reduces the return on investment.

I mean, yea. But I don't see "reduce income inequality" as a proximate solution to almost any problem. It's a systemic problem you work on while fixing everything else you can in the meantime.

Sure, not saying that the solution to the housing crisis is to focus on economic inequality but rather bringing it up to demonstrate how that fundamental problem in society relates to many, seemingly separate ones. So a free market in a relatively equitable society might allocate housing more effectively than one that has a lot of inequality which could enable opportunistic landlords.

The other free market issue is something that was brought up by @Andy Capp which is the attractiveness of short term rental properties. That doesn't apply to every city but it definitely does to ones attractive to tourists like New Orleans, NYC, Miami, SanFran, LA and so on.

 

[My Spot]

That wasn't really my point troll style

My point is how much something sold has no bearing on weather I think something is awesome or not.

In fact, the Backstreet Boys have much more in common with HBK than Hogan.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

Well I'm sold. Build more, more, MORE!

This might be impossible in places that are already very dense like Manhattan where that one skinny ass new apartment building starts at like $1m each unit. There's just no space to build anything. But in most other places, it could probably work.

Here in Houston, there are still lots of empty lots and unused spaces just within a couple miles' radius from downtown. And I got a feeling most cities in the south are in a similar situation.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Hey fuck you it's been in tweets that have been embedded.

If we were any good at this there'd be a lot more charts itt. I miss those days (and also the Creationism stuff Jack mentioned last thread).

Really hasn't even been an opening for the introduction of evidence. That's a bad sign. IMO, if there's a disagreement, what you generally want to do is look for conflicting predictions. But I'm still not quite clear on where the points of disagreement are. Just sounds like a couple of people are generally mad about housing prices and looking to fight.