[LastTrain]

I really hate this “we don’t build enough housing” narrative these days, because it implies this is a simple supply and demand problem, which it is not. I see so many progressives repeating this line, apparently not understanding that they are suggesting unfettered capitalism (up zoning…) is the solution.

The fundamental problem is we simultaneously want our housing to be affordable and good investment. It can’t be both.

[rainsford]

Those aren't really two different arguments. Wanting housing to be a good investment is one of the reasons we have a supply problem because it incentivizes people to vote against allowing more housing to be built. But at the end of the day the high cost of housing really is a simple supply problem, it's the reason for that lack of supply that's more complex.

[LastTrain]

Maybe you can point me to a recent example in the US where more housing was built resulting in a noticeable decrease in housing costs. And a good investment is one where the value increases faster than inflation, the math doesn’t work.

[fragmede]

Austin. They built a ton of apartment buildings so rent is down.

[heroiccocoa]

I can't think of a good reason as to why people would want housing to be a good investment except if their own wealth depends on it or they want to preserve the wealthy character of their own neighborhood. It takes away investment from local enterprise, local government, which would spur innovation, salary growth, better infrastructure, municipal services, etc.

[patmorgan23]

For the average American homeowner 25-50% of their wealth is in their home.

[antinomicus]

Public housing is the answer to this.

[richwater]

The NYCHA is the largest slumlord in the city. The country has proven over decades that it cannot operate public housing with any measure of success.

[LastTrain]

I agree that is a necessary component.