• circuitfarmer
    link
    fedilink
    310 hours ago

    The benefit of market rate housing is that it hopefully will be occupied, allowing for higher income earners to move into a more expensive unit and freeing up an older lower cost unit.

    But this assumes people are moving up the ladder. In 2024 this does not appear to generally be the case, but the system remains skewed to high earners.

    (Not asking a question, just thinking out loud I guess)

    • @allthelolcats
      link
      210 hours ago

      Definitely, it’s easy for a large investor to build new market rate housing, buddy up with a pricing algorithm, and maximize profit. Then they sit until either all the other housing comes up in price or they eventually find someone willing to stomach the price.

      Speaking from my own experience it took me a long time to move into a better apartment, not because I couldn’t afford it, but because there simply wasn’t enough housing that felt like a good value. So I sat in an apartment that was great but didn’t suit all my needs, and when I finally moved that older less expensive unit became available. If there was more newer housing, or more options in general, then maybe I would have moved quicker and that older unit could have been turned over to someone that needed it more sooner.

      I guess my point is that part of it is the speed at which all this can happen is dependent on how much housing there is. And I’m also not saying market rate housing is the solution either. I think affordable housing, co-ops, etc. being part of the mix creates a more fair housing market.

      • circuitfarmer
        link
        fedilink
        110 hours ago

        Thanks for the detailed overview(s).

        I guess a mix of housing types, though perhaps more fair, is likely unattainable. As you said, developers are out to make money, and affordable housing tends not to do that.