Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by stephen_g 44 days ago
Not that simple. In Australia over the last 10 years, the number of dwellings increased by 19% while the population increased by a smaller 16% [1]. Yet house prices still doubled. This is the same trend that has continued for decades, growth in number of dwellings has tended to outstrip population growth but house prices shot up since 2001 when the tax settings were changed to massively benefit speculation.

We also have a pretty high number of unoccupied dwellings that are left empty, since some investors see the bother of renting them out as not worth the money, since they’ll make so much when they sell that it doesn’t matter!

1. https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/is-population-growth-...

4 comments

I think you have the hit the nail on the head, if you have unoccupied or a lot of buildings going out of the market at the same or similar rate as new units coming online than you are falling behind. I didn't do the background research on Austrialia but this I think happens a lot in the US we have a bunch of poorly built things that need to be rebuild in 30-50 years so we are not increasing active housing as much as new construction sometimes suggests
The law of supply and demand doesn't go away. If raw population numbers don't support increasing demand, something else does. My first guess would be less people per house, perhaps culturally driven like fewer roommates and families spreading out.
We are talking about America. In your case housing would be even higher if it were not built. People continue to make things more complicated than it is.

Build, and keep building until it is cheap. Also, you would need to consider the specific places.

The claim is that if you increase supply the price will drop. The counter-example is a case where supply was increased and the price doubled. The question is why did that happen?

It very much looks like the "just build" model is insufficient to explain what's happened in that case.

Demand for housing increased faster than supply. As people gain wealth they demand more housing, so just looking at population changes doesn’t tell you much about housing demand.
Where is the demand coming from, is what I'm getting at. Because it's not from the population on this case, it would seem.
First, lets remember that housing is extremely inelastic, Demand doesnt need to outstrip supply by very much for people to start bidding up properties and prices to double.

Ive never been to Australia, cant speak to the specific situation there, but where I live it is very common for people to have roommates. Many people even share bedrooms to save money. Post covid labor prices for the lowest paid workers has increased substantially. These low paid workers are the most likely to have roommates/shared rooms, and one of the first things they do when they get more money is move into places of their own. Where I live at least you also see the opposite happening. Since housing supply is legally unable to expand people who previously would be living on their own now often find themselves needing roommates, pushing housing demand down.

There are also many people who want second homes and tons of other ways for housing demand to shift without changing population.

Because demand outran the supply. Prices drop when demand falls below supply. Not when new supply is added.
Diiid you read what they said about Australia?

> the number of dwellings increased by 19% while the population increased by a smaller 16%

That is the opposite of demand outrunning supply.

People/businesses own multiple homes.
What exactly they build in Australia, livable dwellings? In New Zealand cities they build 5 meters wide, two floor row houses, upstairs and downstairs split into separate apartments 25-30 sqm large. It's an investment token, not a dwelling. Across Europe they build the same housing tokens but buildings have more floors and are from a concrete instead of wood.