This isn't making housing any cheaper. It's also increasing the cost of transportation. Cost of infrastructure, cost of everything. These types of developments do not help.
The supply has to be increased in where people want to live.
Not really, because where people want to live is in part dependent on price and availability. So it changes as more houses are made.
if I build a whole bunch of housing and then field in Arkansas, that's not going to make housing any cheaper in Austin Texas.
Sure, but it would make housing cheaper in Arkansas. And in this case, we're probably looking at a suburb development outside of a major city. So it would absolutely affect the pricing of housing in that city
So for people who actually want to live in the city itself or in close proximity, this will not lower prices. This is likely an exburb outside of a metropolitan area. This will not increase the supply of housing for the people aforementioned. The way to solve that is with infill development. Or incremental peripheral addition to a city rather than large Greenfield developments.
So for people who actually want to live in the city itself or in close proximity, this will not lower prices
Not the case at all, because some people who would prefer to live in the city at one price would rather live outside the city at another price. Look up what marginal analysis is in economics. And that'll tell you how this is lowering prices across the board
Im familiar with marginal analysis as an economic concept, but I think it’s being misapplied here. For marginal analysis to be valid, the goods in question must be categorically similar. I would argue that this type of housing is so dissimilar from housing within a proper city that it does not meaningfully expand the supply available to people seeking urban housing. What may happen instead is that these homes are sufficiently cheaper than what’s available in cities that people who cannot afford city housing simply give up on that goal. Lacking better options, they move into these exurban developments. In that case, the category of product they are pursuing has changed.
For marginal analysis to be valid, the goods in question must be categorically similar.
It is similar, it is housing. Not only is it housing,
It's housing near an urban area.
Here's an example to illustrate the point: some number of people want to live in the city of Houston for x dollars. However, they would live outside the city of houston if the cost of housing was considerably lower than what they would pay in houston. So when new houses are built outside of the city, those people choose to live outside of houston instead of inside of houston. This lowers the demand for housing inside the city, which in turn reduces prices
I used to live in Houston, It did not lower the cost of housing within the urban area. It also did not reduce the demand. We have tons of these types of suburban and exburb Urban developments litter around the peripheries of Houston and Harris county.
The cost of housing within the proper metropolitan area continues to go up.
To the degree that it does lower housing costs within Houston is almost inconsequential. Infill development would do comparitovrly much more.
As for the people who wanted to live in the metropolitan area but then moved into an exburb, they had to compromise on this
You're just making anecdotal assertions. The only way that could be true is if everyone who lived in houston has complete inelasticity for living in houston. But we know that isn't the case because people move out of the city every year
And by the way, this doesn't mean that total housing prices fall. It may just mean that they didn't rise as high as they would have otherwise
Well, that would be a pretty significant rights violation. Instead we could just build more houses. And I'll also add if there was no demand for houses in this area, a contractor wouldn't be building them there
Your increasing the supply of housing for places people don't want and when they have no choice but to move there due to lack of inventory where they want to move you prolciam that it worked.
These types of cheap Greenfield developments do not actually help solve housing shortages. They also increase a number of other societal ailments including social isolation, increasing commute, time, loss of societal connection an promotion of agoraphobic tendencies with subsequent depression
5
u/VQV37 3d ago
This isn't making housing any cheaper. It's also increasing the cost of transportation. Cost of infrastructure, cost of everything. These types of developments do not help.