[CaptainZapp]

Housing is not a free market because its supply is artificially restricted by zoning regulations meant to protect the value of current homeowners' properties.

So, you're argueing that you'll be fine living near a major hog farm in the middle of a city or a couple of major brothels (which are legal in a lot of places around the world)?

[ehmish]

There's a big difference between a hog farm, which no-one's trying to build in cities, and where we aren't doing it for the welfare of others, and say what's more commonly struck down, which is affordable housing and homeless shelters which directly improve people's lives, even if it causes a bit of harm to the people who live in the place already

[emblaegh]

Nice strawman bud.

[CaptainZapp]

Where exactly is the strawman?

Parent made argument that zoning is the whole problem, is bad and entrenches home owners.

I provided two - albeit extreme - examples, why zoning is important.

Methinks that the consequences of the libertarian arguments of DAMN REGULATION! are quite often rather badly thought through. And that's what I wanted to point out.

Don't want to live near a tannery? Then you probably should be careful, when arguing for the abolishment of zoning and building regulations.

[Macross8299]

It's a strawman because you are pretending that arguing for less restrictions on residential zoning (allowing the construction of more housing) is equivalent to arguing that distinctions between residential/business zoning shouldn't exist at all.

I can argue for more apartment blocks to be built without necessarily arguing for less regulations on the locations of brothers and hog farms.

[emblaegh]

> Where exactly is the strawman?

> Parent made argument that zoning is the whole problem

Did I though? Or that did I made the argument that some of the zoning regulations contribute to the problem of housing markets being inefficient (which is a subset of the whole affordable housing problem)?