Some people say they’re not opposed to housing construction, in theory, but to “market rate” housing. These supposed anti-poverty advocates are not only useful idiots for NIMBYs, but ignore the way that all housing production--even market rate--benefits all groups.
Some people say they’re not opposed to housing construction, in theory, but to “market rate” housing. These supposed anti-poverty advocates are not only useful idiots for NIMBYs, but ignore the way that all housing production–even market rate–benefits all groups.
Just consider: in markets for other products, like cell phones, laptops, and automobiles, prices have decreased because as producers discovered cheaper and more efficient ways of manufacturing them, the quantity increased. The same goes with housing: as newer, more expensive units become available, high earners avoid the older units, which become cheaper, through a process called filtering.
If America had laws mandating that car- or laptop-manufacturers had to produce at certain quantities or prices, many manufacturers would no longer be profitable, and withdraw. This is broadly recognized, which is why such laws don’t exist. But they exist for housing because some people want less housing. And the reason is that, for these people, housing is a personal investment, to be insulated from competition.
Krishan Madan is passionate about zoning and its impact on housing affordability. He is currently a rising sophomore at Lehigh University, where he is pursuing a BA in computer science.