The Stock Market Is Not The Economy Thread II

[archibaldcrane]

It does need to be fixed. SFH zoning is a product of racism, implemented after explicit racial covenants were outlawed.

"Why don't we just fix racism instead?" - a moron

[archibaldcrane]

But let's take your implied claim seriously for a second

"Restrictive zoning exists because landlords make more money when housing supply is limited, and this is an aspect of capitalism, therefore what you are really objecting to is capitalism writ large"

It's entirely true that entrenched landlords benefit from tight housing supply and their economic motivation under capitalism is to maintain that tightness.

However

There are many other economic actors affected by restrictive zoning who have the opposite incentive. First order would be real estate developers and residential construction contractors - they have an obvious motivation to legalize multifamily construction, because it means more opportunities for profit.

Beyond the first order is the broader effects of high housing prices. Here in LA we have a hotel worker's strike, and their largest complaint is their wages aren't high enough to afford housing. There's all sorts of low and medium wage occupations that function just fine in cities that aren't housing supply constrained that become either economically unfeasible and can move (manufacturing) or require increasingly unpalatable tradeoffs (public sector like teachers, cops, firefighters) as workers need to claw their way to housing security on the backs of those below them on the wage scale. This is bad for business.

And then, there's reams of evidence that economic growth is fueled by agglomeration effects - the clustering of talent, ideas, business formation that spring from density, and limiting that density restricts the rocket fuel of growth. Again, bad for business.

So from a capitalism POV, restrictive zoning is entrenched landlords vs. basically every other economic participant in an area. If "capitalism gets what it wants" it wouldn't create SFH zoning.

[NynJa]

No one wants to live in a fucking apartment.

[synistar]

No one wants to live in a fucking apartment.

No wants a 90 minute commute either.

[NynJa]

That sounds like a LA problem

However, thats true, commutes suck. That also seems to be an american workforce problem of “EVERYONE MUST BE AT THE OFFICE” despite working jobs that can absolutely be done remotely.

[Zealot]

I would like to buy a house but I would live in an apartment if someone would build one with a large, easily accessible outdoor area for dogs.

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

[archibaldcrane]

No one wants to live in a fucking apartment.

The prices people pay for condos would disagree with you.

The point isn't "force people to live in multifamily" it's "allow people who want to, to do so."

[Andalusian girls]

i'm not really buying this whole 'build more housing' to solve the housing shortage line

[Gredival]

i'm not really buying this whole 'build more housing' to solve the housing shortage line

Sounds like socialism to me.

[Spicyryan]

But let's take your implied claim seriously for a second

"Restrictive zoning exists because landlords make more money when housing supply is limited, and this is an aspect of capitalism, therefore what you are really objecting to is capitalism writ large"

It's entirely true that entrenched landlords benefit from tight housing supply and their economic motivation under capitalism is to maintain that tightness.

However

There are many other economic actors affected by restrictive zoning who have the opposite incentive. First order would be real estate developers and residential construction contractors - they have an obvious motivation to legalize multifamily construction, because it means more opportunities for profit.

Beyond the first order is the broader effects of high housing prices. Here in LA we have a hotel worker's strike, and their largest complaint is their wages aren't high enough to afford housing. There's all sorts of low and medium wage occupations that function just fine in cities that aren't housing supply constrained that become either economically unfeasible and can move (manufacturing) or require increasingly unpalatable tradeoffs (public sector like teachers, cops, firefighters) as workers need to claw their way to housing security on the backs of those below them on the wage scale. This is bad for business.

And then, there's reams of evidence that economic growth is fueled by agglomeration effects - the clustering of talent, ideas, business formation that spring from density, and limiting that density restricts the rocket fuel of growth. Again, bad for business.

So from a capitalism POV, restrictive zoning is entrenched landlords vs. basically every other economic participant in an area. If "capitalism gets what it wants" it wouldn't create SFH zoning.

It's like you just give lip service to motivations and then act like the economy and laws are not directly attached to them. As if the laws about zoning are some anomaly that fell from the sky. Bad problems sometimes get bad "solutions". It doesn't mean you can turn around and say that if capitalism got what what it wanted then it wouldn't be an issue.

The part about agglomeration and rocket fuel horseshit sounds like you just regurgitated someone's PowerPoint presentation. Obviously clustering talent in one location produces results rather than more sparse interaction and cooperation. None of that reinforces anything against the very basic shit I am asserting.

This is why the landlords just get the wall.

[Jaybar]

I'm just really glad Archi took up the mantle on this one because I just don't have the energy to delve into the housing problem.

Point of fact, restrictive zoning was never implemented to profit from a capitalist agenda. Zoning is a relatively new practice considering the long-running history of architecture and urban development.

[archibaldcrane]

The part about agglomeration and rocket fuel horseshit sounds like you just regurgitated someone's PowerPoint presentation. Obviously clustering talent in one location produces results rather than more sparse interaction and cooperation.

...

[Cantih]

No one wants to live in a fucking apartment.

No wants a 90 minute commute either.

I'm happy living in an apartment. I don't want fucking yardwork.

What nobody wants is shitty neighbors. And this can be ameliorated in apartments if you build ones with enough isolation and soundproofing that you don't care if the guy upstairs plays DDR or practices the bagpipes for hours on end.

[Zealot]

"Obviously your point is correct but that just proves how it's wrong."

[Gredival]

"Obviously your point is correct but that just proves how it's wrong."

ThisIsWhatSpicyActuallyBelieves.jpg

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

[Cail]

[NynJa]

enough isolation and soundproofing

That sounds like extra money spent for no reason.

[Richybear]

Jonathan Davis filtering

[thetruepandagod]

That sounds like extra money spent for no reason.

for real, we dropped 80k+ on trying to soundproof everything when we did the bathrooms and it did fuck all

[Byrthnoth]

Only really soundproof apartment building I have been to was converted from a military building and had concrete slabs between apartments.