Joseph Lawler has an article in the Washington Examiner that does a good job of surveying the potential scope of the housing supply shortage. He notes the wide range of estimates about the number of additional units needed to reclaim a reasonable level of affordability, citing estimates from as little as a couple million to as many as 20 million.
Terrific post. I very much admire your tenacity to try and correct the dominant but WRONG beliefs about housing. Unfortunately, the dynamics of housing are strongly counterintuitive, especially as our zeitgeist slides ever farther against capitalism. It's the market, stupid.
Of course, the Native Americans may have one point of view.
I wonder if California would have been better off as an independent nation, with controlled immigration. My guess is it would have been, for the extant residents.
Is a nation there for the extant residents and citizens, or for the immigrants? It is a rather globalist point of view that all nations must keep their borders open for all immigrants.
There is no iron law of immigration, that some periods of immigration were positive on net (even for existing residents), ergo all new periods of immigration must also be beneficial.
Sweden sure seems to be having problems.
A big topic obviously.
I will say this: If a nation cannot build housing, then maybe immigration is a bad idea.
If a first-world nation (or formerly first-world nation) does not build housing, but admits millions of new residents...you are going to get problems.
The social media is aflame with angry Canadians, who are now priced out of their own neighborhoods and cities. Should Canadians embrace this result?
Immigration is a tricky topic, and one can wonder if Byran Caplan has lost his marbles. A billion more residents will make your life better in America?
Is it simple nationalism to resent newcomers who appear intent on promoting division and hatred (see Europe)?
I do not know why there is an onus on any nation to promote immigration. The pro-immigrants always seems to come from economic elites, but never from the employee classes. A tale is told in that? The most ardent immigrationists in US history were the slavers.
Of course, the US should build 10 million and maybe 20 million new housing units. Legal immigration, agreed by voters in a democracy, is probably the right choice.
But to Erdmann's point, the whole country is becoming Los Angeles adjacent. This is a bad result.
Thanks for addressing this topic again. I'm guessing that in your next post you might re-tackle the myth that there was a supply surge of housing from 2000 to 2006 until heroic actions by the Fed halted it before it could unbalance the economy. Did we remember to give Bernanke a medal for that?
I appreciate how you make the point about how it isn't "x" number of units that determine shortage or surplus conditions. Housing production is complicated and dynamic under the best of circumstances. Current policies (and by current I mean going back to the 1970's) maintain significant barriers. As you stated recently, the U.S. is now one big closed access city.
Meanwhile, the community of Somerville, Massachusetts just allowed 3 unit dwellings as-of-right on every building lot. How do you like them apples?
Terrific post. I very much admire your tenacity to try and correct the dominant but WRONG beliefs about housing. Unfortunately, the dynamics of housing are strongly counterintuitive, especially as our zeitgeist slides ever farther against capitalism. It's the market, stupid.
That is an interesting question.
Of course, the Native Americans may have one point of view.
I wonder if California would have been better off as an independent nation, with controlled immigration. My guess is it would have been, for the extant residents.
Is a nation there for the extant residents and citizens, or for the immigrants? It is a rather globalist point of view that all nations must keep their borders open for all immigrants.
There is no iron law of immigration, that some periods of immigration were positive on net (even for existing residents), ergo all new periods of immigration must also be beneficial.
Sweden sure seems to be having problems.
A big topic obviously.
I will say this: If a nation cannot build housing, then maybe immigration is a bad idea.
Great post.
If a first-world nation (or formerly first-world nation) does not build housing, but admits millions of new residents...you are going to get problems.
The social media is aflame with angry Canadians, who are now priced out of their own neighborhoods and cities. Should Canadians embrace this result?
Immigration is a tricky topic, and one can wonder if Byran Caplan has lost his marbles. A billion more residents will make your life better in America?
Is it simple nationalism to resent newcomers who appear intent on promoting division and hatred (see Europe)?
I do not know why there is an onus on any nation to promote immigration. The pro-immigrants always seems to come from economic elites, but never from the employee classes. A tale is told in that? The most ardent immigrationists in US history were the slavers.
Of course, the US should build 10 million and maybe 20 million new housing units. Legal immigration, agreed by voters in a democracy, is probably the right choice.
But to Erdmann's point, the whole country is becoming Los Angeles adjacent. This is a bad result.
Thanks for addressing this topic again. I'm guessing that in your next post you might re-tackle the myth that there was a supply surge of housing from 2000 to 2006 until heroic actions by the Fed halted it before it could unbalance the economy. Did we remember to give Bernanke a medal for that?
I appreciate how you make the point about how it isn't "x" number of units that determine shortage or surplus conditions. Housing production is complicated and dynamic under the best of circumstances. Current policies (and by current I mean going back to the 1970's) maintain significant barriers. As you stated recently, the U.S. is now one big closed access city.
Meanwhile, the community of Somerville, Massachusetts just allowed 3 unit dwellings as-of-right on every building lot. How do you like them apples?