[s1artibartfast]

How do you separate speculation from legitimate price increases? If the houses are overpriced due to speculation, why isn't someone building Alternatives and undercutting them? This implies that there is either a real increase in value, a manufactur bottleneck, or both

[alphawhisky]

Civil Engineer/City Planner here. The bottleneck is legislative. NIMBY's are all over in US politics right now, local and larger. These folks put together legislation that makes it extremely hard to build without City/County/Township permission, unless the project benefits them in some way. So, most places will disincentivize new construction unless they get a grant for it, because they feel obligated to help their citizens by keeping taxes low and house values high. New construction does the opposite of these things.

[mothballed]

This is exactly it. I built a house for 60k a few years ago in a HCOL area by finding a legal loophole to permitting/planning that bypassed civil engineers, code inspections, and almost all planning. The house next to me, quite similar and 50 years old, is selling for 5x that.

In the old days it was common to build your own house. And it usually allows a house for half or less the market price. But this is effectively illegal/impractical in most the US. Some simple changes to legislation would halve the average cost of a house overnight!

[bell-cot]

I'm thinking that very few folks, these days, have the mindset & skill set & finances & timeframe to build their own houses.

And it wouldn't be just the currently-active NIMBY's who fought tooth and nail against any "simple changes" that might halve the average cost of a house overnight.

[mothballed]

I was working 60 hours a week, plus raising small children, plus had zero construction experience, plus buying literal pieces of lumber and block paycheck to paycheck as money allowed. If you start at 18 and finish in 20 years, you are still ahead of age of median new home buyer by 2 years.

Some people have valid excuses, but most do not.

[inigyou]

A house doesn't have to be fancy. Live in a tent on a grassy lot? Why not?

But you can't, because the lot is unaffordable

[mothballed]

Last I checked 5 or so years ago a lot big enough to drop a yurt on in San Francisco was only like 100k. Legally unbuildable, but perfectly usable and sanitary with an incinerator toilet, solar, and hauled water. Maybe 200k all in, in roughly the most expensive place in the US.

[inigyou]

If it's legally unbuildable, does that mean you're spending 100k just to get yourself imprisoned for having an illegal structure?

[inigyou]

What was the loophole?

[mothballed]

Do everything yourself and it never touches commercial regulations on licensing, inspection, and and building plans. I recorded a sworn affidavit with the county I was building it myself on my own property for purely personal residential use and then they issued me a permit explicitly stating I did not need to submit building plans or inspections.

Since the house was built without any compensation and not used for any commercial purpose, it bypasses "commerce" which was the auspice under which housing was regulated. When I was done I literally just sent the county a picture of a house and they closed the permit and that was that.

[10000truths]

May I ask where this was? This seems like the kind of thing that would be highly dependent on the wording of the laws of your municipality or state.

[inigyou]

Ah. One of those weird bureaucratic legal things. Probably wouldn't fly in most countries that have building permits.