{"items": [{"author": "Alice", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865226831372", "anchor": "fb-865226831372", "service": "fb", "text": "If you don't know why the regulation exists, then I am skeptical of your ability to overturn it.", "timestamp": "1492373821"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865226831372&reply_comment_id=865226946142", "anchor": "fb-865226831372_865226946142", "service": "fb", "text": "→ I think a lot of it comes from trying to fight poverty by outlawing living like poor people do. But this doesn't actually work.", "timestamp": "1492373872"}, {"author": "Alice", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865226831372&reply_comment_id=865231352312", "anchor": "fb-865226831372_865231352312", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Jeff Kaufman I hope that you are right, because my impression is that the laws are mostly about not living next to poor people.", "timestamp": "1492374665"}, {"author": "Carl", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865226831372&reply_comment_id=865231362292", "anchor": "fb-865226831372_865231362292", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Jeff Kaufman I think a lot of it comes from trying to exile poverty by outlawing living like poor people do. This actually works.", "timestamp": "1492374673"}, {"author": "MN", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865226831372&reply_comment_id=865236312372", "anchor": "fb-865226831372_865236312372", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Mmmmmmmm, Chesterton's Fence.", "timestamp": "1492375851"}, {"author": "Alice", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865226831372&reply_comment_id=865237370252", "anchor": "fb-865226831372_865237370252", "service": "fb", "text": "→ MN I didn't say that we shouldn't remove the fence, I just think that if we start trying to remove it we'll learn that the fence has some fierce defenders and probably be prevented from making any modification to the fence.", "timestamp": "1492376095"}, {"author": "Neil", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865244535892", "anchor": "fb-865244535892", "service": "fb", "text": "I'm not sure about the houses in streets bit: I can't think of that many streets that are wide enough and I think in the long run taking that space away would limit future increases in density (vertically).", "timestamp": "1492376859"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865244535892&reply_comment_id=865255923072", "anchor": "fb-865244535892_865255923072", "service": "fb", "text": "→ I think the case for that one is much stronger in SF and other newer cities than older ones like Boston: http://narrowstreetssf.com/mcallister/", "timestamp": "1492379173"}, {"author": "Daniel", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865244535892&reply_comment_id=865619230002", "anchor": "fb-865244535892_865619230002", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Hmm, I had the same thought, Neil, but it could make sense in newer cities that have much wider streets and could still have narrow streets remaining after the change.
In areas where the (not-heavily used) streets are relatively narrow, you'd have to remove the street entirely to make room for houses in the middle. If you had to remove the street to make this happen, I don't think it would be worth it. Even in areas where most people commute on public transit, not having access with a moving truck when you need it is a substantial inconvenience.", "timestamp": "1492442080"}, {"author": "Andrew", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865279595632", "anchor": "fb-865279595632", "service": "fb", "text": "* Stop giving loans to anyone with 1-3% down as the FHFA under Mel Watt started to do (again) -- enforce more rigid downpayment requirements from the 80s. 10-20% down, base max loan amount on market rent over the past 5 years times an average net cap rate. i.e. if the home doesn't cost less than renting to buy, bank shouldn't loan on it. Bubble control 101.", "timestamp": "1492383061"}, {"author": "Andrew", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865279665492", "anchor": "fb-865279665492", "service": "fb", "text": "* Discourage vacant second homes in urban areas. If it's not lived in or rented out (i.e. a pied a terre), property tax should go up x1000.", "timestamp": "1492383093"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865279665492&reply_comment_id=865305438842", "anchor": "fb-865279665492_865305438842", "service": "fb", "text": "→ What if you're doing construction?
(And if that's ok, how often can you do it and how long can it take? Very loopholey)", "timestamp": "1492387643"}, {"author": "Colin", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865279665492&reply_comment_id=865306666382", "anchor": "fb-865279665492_865306666382", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Measures can still have value even if some people manage to find loopholes around them. One way to mitigate loophole use here would be to say each month you must spend x% the value of the home on construction or you pay some fine. Obviously it would not stop some people (especially the very wealthy), but it would reduce abuse.", "timestamp": "1492388028"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865279665492&reply_comment_id=865315937802", "anchor": "fb-865279665492_865315937802", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Colin: NYC allows you to raise rent by an amount proportional to what you spend making the unit nicer in some cases. A major effect of this is corrupt contractors.
(Also: can you buy a place and do construction yourself? What I'd the work is mostly labor and not materials, so your measured expenses are low?)", "timestamp": "1492389669"}, {"author": "Colin", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865279665492&reply_comment_id=865324500642", "anchor": "fb-865279665492_865324500642", "service": "fb", "text": "→ I do not understand the purpose of your primary comment here. Could you clarify?
As for your parenthetical comment, that is a good point. If you're doing most of the labor yourself, you should be able to estimate the number of hours you put in and calculate the value of that labor.", "timestamp": "1492391555"}, {"author": "Andrew", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865279665492&reply_comment_id=865325643352", "anchor": "fb-865279665492_865325643352", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Contractors paid to claim to be \"working\" on a home while doing very little work, slowly?", "timestamp": "1492391646"}, {"author": "Daniel", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865279665492&reply_comment_id=865619968522", "anchor": "fb-865279665492_865619968522", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Colin, the point is that it had unintended effects. The idea, of course, was that rent shouldn't go up more than the value you added by making it a better apartment. But the actual impact was that people would inflate the cost of the work so that they could also inflate the rental price of the apartment.", "timestamp": "1492442320"}, {"author": "Daniel", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865288542702", "anchor": "fb-865288542702", "service": "fb", "text": "Why debate the fine points of policy? We should just say \"Adopt the policies that successful cities have.\" http://marginalrevolution.com/.../laissez-faire-in-tokyo...", "timestamp": "1492385033"}, {"author": "Colin", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865308961782", "anchor": "fb-865308961782", "service": "fb", "text": "These are all interesting practical ideas for making it easier to increase the housing density in cities. From my time living in the Bay Area, however, I get the impression that the real barrier here is not so much a lack of practical ideas for increasing housing density. Rather, the barrier is that many of the people who already live here do not WANT population density to go up. Low population density pushes up the value of their homes and preserves the \"character\" of their neighborhoods (and yes, there are racist/classist overtones here).
As far as I can tell, at least in the Bay Area, what we need are means of changing peoples' attitudes towards housing density. And I have no idea how to do that.", "timestamp": "1492388353"}, {"author": "Michael", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865312090512", "anchor": "fb-865312090512", "service": "fb", "text": "At least one of those rules is to fight hippies. The \"four unrelated adult\" rule is also known as the \"commune law\" (or \"anti-commune law\").", "timestamp": "1492388960"}, {"author": "Andrew", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865312090512&reply_comment_id=865312419852", "anchor": "fb-865312090512_865312419852", "service": "fb", "text": "→ I've heard it was to fight bordellos -- \"four unrelated women.\"", "timestamp": "1492389037"}, {"author": "Julia", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865312090512&reply_comment_id=865312444802", "anchor": "fb-865312090512_865312444802", "service": "fb", "text": "→ And noisy students.", "timestamp": "1492389048"}, {"author": "Michael", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865312090512&reply_comment_id=865312958772", "anchor": "fb-865312090512_865312958772", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Julia Well, yes, but only in college neghborhoods. The anti-commune laws I have met personally were in an area nowhere near a college. But I've also seen them in areas bordering a college area, and I've seen the results of not having them in Allston/Brighton.", "timestamp": "1492389168"}, {"author": "Andrew", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865312090512&reply_comment_id=865313203282", "anchor": "fb-865312090512_865313203282", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Michael -- by results you mean an interesting area? If one can't deal with young people hanging out/partying, maybe they should move to a cabin in Montana.", "timestamp": "1492389274"}, {"author": "Michael", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865312090512&reply_comment_id=865313856972", "anchor": "fb-865312090512_865313856972", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Andrew Actually, I meant the architectural desecration of once-beautiful building interiors, where 2 bedroom apartments with living room, and dining room have been turned into dangerously crowded 8-bedroom student slums with hallways that stink of beer, and inadequate exits in the event of a fire.
There's a comfort zone between the two. The anti-commune laws are not the correct solution; no regulation at all doesn't seem to produce good results either.", "timestamp": "1492389480"}, {"author": "Goedjn", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865312090512&reply_comment_id=865319316032", "anchor": "fb-865312090512_865319316032", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Dangerously crowded and lack of exits, though, is a function of how many people live there, not how (if) they're related.", "timestamp": "1492390225"}, {"author": "Michael", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865312090512&reply_comment_id=865319430802", "anchor": "fb-865312090512_865319430802", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Goedjn True!", "timestamp": "1492390271"}, {"author": "Michael", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865312090512&reply_comment_id=865319545572", "anchor": "fb-865312090512_865319545572", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Also, I've already spoken out against that law.", "timestamp": "1492390312"}, {"author": "Daniel", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865312090512&reply_comment_id=865621260932", "anchor": "fb-865312090512_865621260932", "service": "fb", "text": "→ \"Dangerously crowded and lack of exits, though, is a function of how many people live there, not how (if) they're related.\"
So true. That's been one of my objections to the law. If it's a fire capacity or something like that, make it a maximum number of people, period. If it's at reasonable capacity with a 6-person family, then it's still at reasonable capacity with 6 unrelated friends/housemates. But, of course, it's there because they'd have had trouble pushing it through if it was going to push out FAMILIES. Family values, y'all!
Also weird is that the no-more-than-4 law doesn't vary at all depending on size and number of bedrooms/bathrooms, kitchens. So, it would be legal to have 4 unrelated people in a small studio apartment. But, it would be illegal to have 5 unrelated people in a 5-bedroom apartment with 2 baths and 2 kitchens. WTF?
Oh, and they don't actually have to be related. They just have to share a last name. So, if you have a common name like Taylor or Smith and live with an unrelated person who shares that name, you're all good. If, on the other hand, your sister gets married and changes her last name, she no longer counts as related to you.", "timestamp": "1492442719"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865312090512&reply_comment_id=865648052242", "anchor": "fb-865312090512_865648052242", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Daniel: \"share a last name\"
What? Where does it work like that? In Somerville the text of the law uses \"unrelated\".", "timestamp": "1492447746"}, {"author": "Daniel", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865312090512&reply_comment_id=865672109032", "anchor": "fb-865312090512_865672109032", "service": "fb", "text": "→ I'm pretty sure that's how it worked when I was first made aware of the law, living in Malden at the time. It might still have said \"unrelated\" somewhere, but I think they defined related/unrelated based on your last name. I'm having trouble tracking down Malden's exact law at the moment to confirm it, though.", "timestamp": "1492452461"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865312090512&reply_comment_id=865677737752", "anchor": "fb-865312090512_865677737752", "service": "fb", "text": "→ @Daniel: maybe that was your property management company being silly?", "timestamp": "1492453209"}, {"author": "Daniel", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865312090512&reply_comment_id=865679738742", "anchor": "fb-865312090512_865679738742", "service": "fb", "text": "→ It's possible. We didn't actually have a property management company, and dealt directly with our landlord, but we were totally unaware of it until we were in violation of it. We had a pretty good relationship with our landlord at the time, but my wife Iris (Mary at the time) had just moved in and was sharing my room. After a disagreement with another housemate in our shared apartment about how much that should change our portion of the shared rent, she talked to the landlord about how that made Iris the 5th person in our 4-bedroom apartment. I think it was implied, if not stated, that she wanted the landlord to enforce it.
We ended up nearly doubling our rent, being forced to take over a second bedroom that we really didn't need when someone else moved out, just to satisfy the rule. Had we been married at the time, I'm pretty sure it wouldn't have applied to us. It was framed to us as different last names, but I don't think I ever looked up the precise law in the books.", "timestamp": "1492453618"}, {"author": "Michael", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865312434822", "anchor": "fb-865312434822", "service": "fb", "text": "Changing the relationship between houses and cars is one of the fundamental issues addressed in co-housing groups. Typically, they wind up with walkable streets and a large parking lot not too far from the houses.", "timestamp": "1492389046"}, {"author": "Michael", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865312434822&reply_comment_id=865312714262", "anchor": "fb-865312434822_865312714262", "service": "fb", "text": "→ http://www.cohousing.org/Mosaic%20Commons", "timestamp": "1492389084"}, {"author": "Dave", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865328727172", "anchor": "fb-865328727172", "service": "fb", "text": "I don't think the restrictions on four unrelated adults living together are legal in most places. They're on the books, but they're unenforceable. If landlords are following them, it's because they want to, not because they need to. I'm also a little unclear what you mean by the \"don't worry about affordability\" point. I agree that it's better if existing affordable units stay as they are and aren't gut-renovated into luxury housing (even if some of the luxury units might be set aside as affordable). But removing the requirements that new buildings rent a certain percentage of units at 50% AMI or whatever would encourage, not discourage, developers to tear down affordable housing and replace it with market-rate luxury developments.", "timestamp": "1492392078"}, {"author": "Andrew", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865328727172&reply_comment_id=865329211202", "anchor": "fb-865328727172_865329211202", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Depending how much is built -- a lot of new units (even luxury ones) coming in will depress prices.", "timestamp": "1492392191"}, {"author": "Dave", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865328727172&reply_comment_id=865329256112", "anchor": "fb-865328727172_865329256112", "service": "fb", "text": "→ The essential issue here is that there's two things at play. One is that, in big cities like yours and mine where a lot of people live, there's not enough housing being built or otherwise created to support the number of people who want to move here. The second is, of the existing housing, it's allocated primarily on the basis of wealth. Both of these issues are problems.", "timestamp": "1492392204"}, {"author": "Dave", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865328727172&reply_comment_id=865329350922", "anchor": "fb-865328727172_865329350922", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Andrew, sure, but tearing down existing affordable housing and replacing it with new luxury housing doesn't do that.", "timestamp": "1492392231"}, {"author": "Andrew", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865328727172&reply_comment_id=865329535552", "anchor": "fb-865328727172_865329535552", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Replacing 2-3 fam homes with taller buildings might, and developers typically will build higher-density if they can.", "timestamp": "1492392305"}, {"author": "Dave", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865328727172&reply_comment_id=865330847922", "anchor": "fb-865328727172_865330847922", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Sure. And I'm totally fine with regulations that allow replacing 2-3 family homes with taller, higher density buildings, even if there's some affordability sacrifice there. What I'm not ok with is replacing 60 affordable mostly 3-bedroom family units with 180 1-bedroom luxury condos, which developers frequently attempt to do.", "timestamp": "1492392666"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865328727172&reply_comment_id=865349131282", "anchor": "fb-865328727172_865349131282", "service": "fb", "text": "→ I'm fine with existing affordable programs, especially ones like the affordable housing bonus program in SF, but I don't think expanding affordability programs is as high a priority as getting more units built.", "timestamp": "1492395320"}, {"author": "Marcus", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865328727172&reply_comment_id=865362843802", "anchor": "fb-865328727172_865362843802", "service": "fb", "text": "→ The main source of new affordable units is not private development, rather it's the Low Income Housing Tax Credit. Likewise the main impediment to new development is not inclusionary zoning requirements, (though they do add some cost), it's land use restrictions.", "timestamp": "1492397729"}, {"author": "Michael", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865328727172&reply_comment_id=865371835782", "anchor": "fb-865328727172_865371835782", "service": "fb", "text": "→ David Casserly: http://somerville.wickedlocal.com/.../group-calls-for-end...
http://massrealestatelawblog.com/.../the-toga-party-is.../
Hmm. Overruled on appeal in 2013: http://massrealestatelawblog.com/.../breaking-sjc-rules.../", "timestamp": "1492400073"}, {"author": "Dave", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865328727172&reply_comment_id=865374235972", "anchor": "fb-865328727172_865374235972", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Michael, the SJC case you pointed to is the one I was thinking of in MA. But more generally, I think such restrictions are generally illegal in MA (and here). It's family status discrimination, which violates MGL ch 151b's prohibition on discrimination based on marital status and children.", "timestamp": "1492400751"}, {"author": "Michael", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865328727172&reply_comment_id=865385223952", "anchor": "fb-865328727172_865385223952", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Well, according to the WickedLocal article, it was still being enforced in Somerville & Medford, and probably Cambridge and Boston, in 2016.", "timestamp": "1492403420"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865328727172&reply_comment_id=865466635802", "anchor": "fb-865328727172_865466635802", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Somerville is revising the zoning rules, and there's a lot of contraversy over whether to keep it. The town definitely thinks it's legal, and as a whole landlords belive then.", "timestamp": "1492426200"}, {"author": "Jameson", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865612772942", "anchor": "fb-865612772942", "service": "fb", "text": "These are almost all orthodoxy among urbanist planners these days, in my reading (and read a LOT about this stuff, books, papers, blogs, twitter.) The issue is that people tend to think the neighborhood they buy into should never change, that parking should always be \"free\" (ie they be insulated from the cost of it) and plentiful, and that poor people (especially brown ones) are ugly and dangerous.
(Bedrooms have a reasonable requirement to have a window large enough to get a person out of, in the event of fire.)", "timestamp": "1492440891"}, {"author": "Shan", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865617872722", "anchor": "fb-865617872722", "service": "fb", "text": "All excellent suggestion, but the out of control prices won't be curbed this way, it will just become more affordable for current owners, and help with cheap rental availability. Homes are an investment, but they are an investment that people need and cant really bw unregulated, or they will be subject to market forces. Global market forces. A price cap, a foreign owners tax, and a vacancy tax are needed to help curb out of control house prices, lest some locals will always have to rent.", "timestamp": "1492441936"}, {"author": "Lauren", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865617872722&reply_comment_id=866177800622", "anchor": "fb-865617872722_866177800622", "service": "fb", "text": "→ > cant really be unregulated, or they will be subject to market forces
I think that's why you'd unregulate them", "timestamp": "1492573367"}, {"author": "Shan", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865617872722&reply_comment_id=866193339482", "anchor": "fb-865617872722_866193339482", "service": "fb", "text": "→ And then no one local or who doesnt have money to take advantage of speculation could afford a house? I'm not disagreeing with the op, what i am saying is that his suggestion addresses housing shortages, which would lower rent, but not out of control house prices. Is it preferred that 95% of locals rent in large metropolitan areas, or is it preferable that a majority of forward thinking people have the actual financial ability to invest in a house? Houses cannot be free market, there has to be a degree of protectionism regulation or you have issues in hot markets.", "timestamp": "1492579013"}, {"author": "Jacob", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865617872722&reply_comment_id=866210784522", "anchor": "fb-865617872722_866210784522", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Houses are not an investment any more than a car is. Housing has a serious problem where everyone thinks of it as an investment that should only go up, when the only thing you're really getting is control.", "timestamp": "1492586043"}, {"author": "Lauren", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865617872722&reply_comment_id=866313653372", "anchor": "fb-865617872722_866313653372", "service": "fb", "text": "→ I mean if you want land to be a good investment, build a really tall apartment building", "timestamp": "1492610099"}, {"author": "Shan", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865617872722&reply_comment_id=866327256112", "anchor": "fb-865617872722_866327256112", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Of course housing is an investment. It is a large asset that doesn't really depreciate that, if maintained, one can extract perpetual income from through rental. A car will depreciate to zero and will eventually have a mechanical problem worth more than the value of the car. Comparing the two is silly.
There should be healthy growth, and healthy growth is inflation plus maybe a percent or two. What is happening now in large metropolitan cities is unhealthy growth and could only be reigned in with smart regulation.
A taxation on speculation would make it so only people who plan on keeping a house for a while can actually buy. This reduces demand, as well as rent as the value of the houses and the money needed for mortgages are less. A foreign investment cap would do the same, reducing demand and vacancy rates. Finally a price cap deters unhealthy investment and reigns in unhealthy growth. These things are needed in hot markets.", "timestamp": "1492615410"}, {"author": "Jacob", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865617872722&reply_comment_id=866356133242", "anchor": "fb-865617872722_866356133242", "service": "fb", "text": "→ In a sane environment, houses depreciate. They require maintenance. We have put massive amounts of regulation and policy to make them always increase in value; this is not *normal* or *expected*.
If we were building enough housing on a regular basis, house prices would go down as often as up (relative to inflation and return on other investment). That is the natural course of market forces, all deviation from it is a distortion.", "timestamp": "1492624262"}, {"author": "Lauren", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865617872722&reply_comment_id=866360245002", "anchor": "fb-865617872722_866360245002", "service": "fb", "text": "→ I do have to give you credit for totally describing the effects of deregulation correctly, Shan. I think you're very wrong about whether those effects are on net good.", "timestamp": "1492625708"}, {"author": "Shan", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865617872722&reply_comment_id=866373593252", "anchor": "fb-865617872722_866373593252", "service": "fb", "text": "→ houses do not depreciate in any economically healthy environment. Populations grow, cities grow, locations and land become valuable, thus the value of homes grow with demand. Not to mention the value extracted from rental which is a function of minimum wage and can only drop so low. Houses aren't set to increase in value because of regulation ensuring it. They are set to increase in value over time to keep up with inflation and meet demand. The only time houses depreciate is when the market is poor, decreasing demand and the value of the land, as the area isn't an economic engine.
Healthy growth is good, which is inflation plus a few percent. Unhealthy growth, which can be visible in Toronto's current 30% spike, is not sustainable. It prices most people out of the market, and drives up housing costs, both for owners and renters. You cannot have a hot housing market without regulation and protectionist taxes, lest the mortgage will take on it's initial meaning. You pay until you die (mort.)", "timestamp": "1492629410"}, {"author": "Jacob", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865617872722&reply_comment_id=866374356722", "anchor": "fb-865617872722_866374356722", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Houses depreciate if supply is unrestricted, which it never has been.", "timestamp": "1492629543"}, {"author": "Shan", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865617872722&reply_comment_id=866375354722", "anchor": "fb-865617872722_866375354722", "service": "fb", "text": "→ supply is naturally restricted by land, major metropolises are saturated going horizontally, they can only go vertically, meaning building taller multi dwelling housing. The further out you go, the less convenient it becomes for the dwellers, thus lowering the demand and prices of the housing and increasing the demand closer to the economic engine. Taking Toronto again as an example, I can buy a completely serviceable house an hour out of the city for 1/4th the price, but that really isn't ideal. I would rather housing in Toronto be affordable.", "timestamp": "1492629870"}, {"author": "Michael", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865617872722&reply_comment_id=866377809802", "anchor": "fb-865617872722_866377809802", "service": "fb", "text": "→ 1) Jacob, you seem to be arguing not that houses aren't investments but that they ought not be investments.
2) I'm pretty sure that houses are treated as investments quite frequently.
3) If they depreciate in value under conditions that never obtain, how relevant is that?", "timestamp": "1492630783"}, {"author": "Jacob", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865617872722&reply_comment_id=866386447492", "anchor": "fb-865617872722_866386447492", "service": "fb", "text": "→ The regulatory environment is consistently rigged to keep housing prices going up, because there has been a collective fiction throughout the postwar period that everyone should be a homeowner and it should be your big long-term asset. It can't keep going forever, because the policies put in place to keep that fiction in place have been the direct causes of the housing unaffordability crisis in major cities across the country and world. Investing in housing is like investing in biofuels; it's not a good value proposition, but the subsidies are politically untouchable so you can mooch off the public purse to make reliable money.
And Shan has mentioned the reason it's not inherently limited himself: they can build vertically. It's exclusively government regulation that has made that not happen; it's an economic no-brainer in the absence of policies put in place to prevent it. Every city should be at least as dense as Paris, with anything shorter than a three-story apartment block being luxury housing, the norm being 4-6 floors, and higher in the dense parts of the city.", "timestamp": "1492633007"}, {"author": "Michael", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=865617872722&reply_comment_id=866426127972", "anchor": "fb-865617872722_866426127972", "service": "fb", "text": "→ I'm not sure I agree that housing would necessarily be a bad investment without all of the government support. For one thing, government support isn't uniform throughout the country. For another, after current imbalances corrected themselves you would still have some pressure from population growth that I think could drive some amount of appreciation in price. Even without that, housing can still make sense as a major asset if all it does is not lose value and serve as actual housing.
Every city should be at least as dense as Paris? Uh, wtf? Maybe every cit above some threshold, but why should Cleveland be as dense as Paris? Why should Asheville? I'm pretty sure that if the US got rid of all zoning laws, market forces wouldn't drive a lot of small and mid size cities to that level of density. It really feels to me like you're generalizing off of an extreme example.", "timestamp": "1492644254"}, {"author": "Daniel", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/113952791760990667476", "anchor": "gp-1492454666598", "service": "gp", "text": "The underlying issue is that building codes are in the hands of local, not national or state, authorities, and they act on the preferences of local residents which are driven by politically active locals (often based on the urge to keep poor people out).\n
\nAlso consider that adding more people to the city does impose a real cost and burden on the infrastructure, and materially hurts existing residents. Since you seem to have a free-market bent, you could consider the benefits of externalizing that with a fixed residency tax (a \"poll tax\"). But remember what happened to Margaret Thatcher when she tried that.", "timestamp": 1492454666}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/103013777355236494008", "anchor": "gp-1492455475252", "service": "gp", "text": "@Daniel\n \"real cost and burden on the infrastructure, and materially hurts existing residents\"\n
\n
\nDo those costs really go up, when considered on a per-person basis? What sort of costs are you thinking of?", "timestamp": 1492455475}, {"author": "Daniel", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/113952791760990667476", "anchor": "gp-1492455933573", "service": "gp", "text": "I'm talking about roads, transport, sidewalks, restrooms, water, policing, hospitals, trash disposal-- whatever the city has to provide. The city may not have been built with more people in mind, and it can cost a lot to add these types of infrastructure to a city after it has already been built (c.f. cost of new metro in NYC). One reason it may be rational for cities to attempt to exclude poor people, is that their economic benefit to the city may be less than the burden they impose on it. To take it to the extreme-- would you want to live in Lagos?", "timestamp": 1492455933}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/103013777355236494008", "anchor": "gp-1492460046520", "service": "gp", "text": "@Daniel\n Most of those are things that can be more cheaply provided at higher density, enough that on balance I think density increases almost always are cheaper per-person.\n
\n
\nI'm not sure what you're getting at with Lagos? I don't know anything about it.", "timestamp": 1492460046}, {"author": "Daniel", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/113952791760990667476", "anchor": "gp-1492463207869", "service": "gp", "text": "\" more cheaply provided at higher density\"... that may be true in some cases if the city was planned well from the start, and built around good public transport. But retro-fitting to existing cities is extremely expensive and not always even possible depending on various legal and practical restrictions.\n
\nLondon and Paris were lucky in being built on top of deep limestone, which makes tunnelling easy and cheap. Many cities don't have that luxury.", "timestamp": 1492463207}, {"author": "Ray", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=866147531282", "anchor": "fb-866147531282", "service": "fb", "text": "Jeff, have you considered getting involved in municipal government? I suspect your local planning or zoning board would benefit tremendously from your input.", "timestamp": "1492564539"}, {"author": "Matthew", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=866173693852", "anchor": "fb-866173693852", "service": "fb", "text": "In buildings where sprinklers are required by fire code, moving the walls around may be tricky.", "timestamp": "1492571588"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=866173693852&reply_comment_id=866264751372", "anchor": "fb-866173693852_866264751372", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Sprinklers aren't generally required in low rise residential construction. (And I think they should continue not to be.)", "timestamp": "1492599356"}, {"author": "Christian", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=872220211582", "anchor": "fb-872220211582", "service": "fb", "text": "Living in Berlin I don't see the problem with \"up-to-the-sidewalk five storey apartment buildings\". Why don't you advocate them? Building taller buildings seem to me to be very straightforward solution.
Apart from that the advent of self driving cars means that parking space shouldn't be a consideration anymore.", "timestamp": "1494928758"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=872220211582&reply_comment_id=872254712442", "anchor": "fb-872220211582_872254712442", "service": "fb", "text": "→ I think neighborhoods like that are good and people who live in them generally like them. On the other hand, they feel very different from the kind of neighborhoods that are common in the US now, even in relatively (for the US) dense places. I don't know what I would do if I was an absolute monarch, but as a practical matter converting neighborhoods like mine into ones like those is incredibly far outside the overton window", "timestamp": "1494942793"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=872220211582&reply_comment_id=872255101662", "anchor": "fb-872220211582_872255101662", "service": "fb", "text": "→ http://l7.alamy.com/.../aerial-view-housing-rows... is my neighborhood, and to most Americans it feels incredibly dense", "timestamp": "1494943004"}, {"author": "Christian", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/865219975112?comment_id=872220211582&reply_comment_id=872272960872", "anchor": "fb-872220211582_872272960872", "service": "fb", "text": "→ On of your suggestion has removing a lot of street space. I'm not sure that the distance between buildings does nothing for the feeling of a neighborhood.
If the next house is much nearer it's easier to see in the window of your neighbors. It also increases noise levels.
Not having parking spaces right in front of your house also changes the characteristic of the neighborhood.
Hopefully that won't matter as much with self driving cars around.
It might also worth to look more specifically into solving problems like noise pollution technically.", "timestamp": "1494950591"}]}