It might be nice to include suggestions (and measurements, where it’s been tried) about moving housing demand to low-cost areas. There’s always a big question in economics about how and why supply/demand/price curves change, and it’s usual to take them as pretty static. If you believe it’s a first-order impact that they can be changed, it falls on you to explain how.
My first question, of course, is “why not both”? Seems like YIMBY laws (forced relaxation of restriction on building in popular areas) allow more housing to be built (BOTH more square footage AND more families in given areas), which is a good thing, even if prices rise—that’s an indication that the housing is even more valuable, presumably because of increased network effects.
It might be nice to include suggestions (and measurements, where it’s been tried) about moving housing demand to low-cost areas. There’s always a big question in economics about how and why supply/demand/price curves change, and it’s usual to take them as pretty static. If you believe it’s a first-order impact that they can be changed, it falls on you to explain how.
My first question, of course, is “why not both”? Seems like YIMBY laws (forced relaxation of restriction on building in popular areas) allow more housing to be built (BOTH more square footage AND more families in given areas), which is a good thing, even if prices rise—that’s an indication that the housing is even more valuable, presumably because of increased network effects.
Here are some suggestions.