forbes.com
Insufficient Housing Construction Drives Up Prices in America
America's housing crisis stems from insufficient new construction, not from investor activity or withheld housing; increased supply, even luxury housing, helps affordability through "filtering", contrary to common progressive arguments.
- How do the actions of private investors affect the housing market, and what are the misconceptions surrounding their role?
- Three common misconceptions hinder solutions: (1) that "luxury" housing doesn't improve affordability; (2) that large investors are solely responsible for high prices; and (3) that ample housing already exists. Data show that increased housing supply lowers costs, that most housing investors are small, and that vacant housing is usually quickly rented.
- What is the primary cause of the current high housing costs in America, and what is its immediate impact on the population?
- America is facing a housing shortage, driving up prices. This shortage is not due to a lack of available land or properties kept off the market, but rather insufficient new housing construction. Increased supply, even of luxury housing, leads to "filtering," making more affordable options available.
- What are the long-term consequences of maintaining the current housing policies, and what changes in approach are necessary to address the housing gap effectively?
- The future impact of continued housing supply skepticism is persistent unaffordability in high-growth areas, exacerbating inequality. Addressing this requires a shift in policy and public perception to recognize that building more housing of all types is essential to solve this problem. This includes streamlining regulations and reducing local resistance to new developments.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing consistently portrays progressives who oppose increased housing supply as holding onto mistaken beliefs. Headings like "Three Myths About Why House Prices Are So High" immediately establish a critical and dismissive tone towards one side of the argument. The article structures the narrative to build a case against progressive arguments, presenting counter-arguments and evidence to refute each point. This framing may influence the reader to favor the pro-increased supply position.
Language Bias
The article uses charged language to describe the progressive viewpoints, such as labeling them "erroneous" and "myths." The choice of words like "rail against," "clinging," and "dysfunctional" reveals a critical tone and biases the reader against those perspectives. More neutral alternatives would be to describe the arguments as 'concerns,' 'beliefs,' or 'positions.'
Bias by Omission
The article focuses primarily on arguments against increasing housing supply from a specific group (progressives), potentially omitting alternative viewpoints or perspectives from other groups involved in the housing debate, such as developers or local residents. It also doesn't fully explore the complexities of gentrification resulting from increased housing supply, nor does it discuss potential negative impacts of increased density.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy by framing the debate as a simple choice between increasing housing supply and maintaining the status quo. It simplifies the complex issue by portraying those who oppose increased housing construction as operating from three 'erroneous myths,' thereby ignoring potential nuances, valid concerns, or alternative approaches.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article addresses the issue of housing shortages in cities, advocating for increased housing construction to alleviate this problem. Increasing housing supply is directly related to SDG 11, which aims to make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable. The article highlights the negative impacts of housing shortages on affordability and quality of life in urban areas, directly linking to SDG 11 targets related to affordable and adequate housing and the improvement of slums. The proposed solutions, such as liberalizing zoning laws and streamlining regulations, are directly in line with SDG 11's goals for sustainable urbanization.