[eo3x0]

Since this comment has been downvoted, I’ll add more math.

Building housing takes anywhere from 3 to 4 years for any significant development that can make a dent. When the average investor can get 7% with minimal risk in the S&P500, you’re looking at rewarding investors a lot more than that in returns over this time period. People would rather invest elsewhere.

Once you factor that in, you’re looking at a large % required return factoring risks like lawsuits, construction mishaps, etc.

There is a reason every new development looks like luxury housing or luxury apartments. The economics don’t favor Levittown style massive buildouts anymore.

The market will reward those who can bring efficiency to something that’s clearly an opportunity to be more efficient. That’s not where we are with housing right now.

[kjkjadksj]

You can’t even run the experiment due to how restrictive the land use is in hawaii. 4% of land is residential and of that a good deal of it is bog standard post war suburban development. Why not just at least upzone the existing residential neighborhoods and attempt to let the market decide for itself if demand is sufficient to justify investing in development instead of making it an impossibility?