 to meet demand. So only the lucky few who win the
housing lottery will benefit. Everyone else (most lower-income people, middle-
income renters overpaying for low-end housing) still loses out.

I'd prefer that we solved the problem for most people rather than just a lucky
few. If people couldn't afford food because not enough farmland was available
for reasons like "preserving the character of the area" (imagine that you
can't truck food in from lower-cost locations in this scenario) you bet we'd
find a way to start growing more food stat. No one would say "Well we'll just
subsidize food for some people so fewer people will starve. But it's no use
letting farmers farm because they'll just grow Kobe beef and avocados instead
of wheat and corn".

~~~
kelnos
> But it's impossible to make affordable and below-market housing profitable
> unless the underlying issues, land acquisition costs and zoning, are
> addressed.

Totally agree. Developers don't want to build affordable housing because they
in some cases actually stand to lose money when doing so. SF's byzantine
planning process makes it that way, and that's not going to change without
some heavy reform there.

------
empath75
If you build new luxury housing presumably people now living in less desirable
housing will upgrade, making their housing available at lower prices, etc.

~~~
1_2__4
This claim keeps popping up. I’ve yet to see it include a citation. Maybe
today will be different.

~~~
empath75
It’s in this very article.

What other outcome could happen?

~~~
throwawaymsft
That new luxury housing makes a city more attractive and induces demand from
outside. Adding new roads can make driving more attractive and worsen
congestion.

Not saying that’s what happens, but a simple supply/demand analysis (ceteris
paribus) may not suffice.

~~~
OrwellianChild
No one has seen fit to build much luxury housing in Cleveland, OH lately, but
what exists already (at rock-bottom prices) doesn't seem to be attracting much
population from outside...

Induced demand is definitely a thing for roads, but that demand is from fixed
supp
to meet demand. So only the golden few who succeed the 
 housing lottery will benefit. Everyone else (about lower - income multitude, middle- 
 income renters overpaying for gloomy - end housing) however loses out. 

 I'd prefer that we clear the problem for most people preferably than just a lucky 
 few. If people couldn't afford food because not enough cultivated land was available 
 for reasons like " preserving the character of the sphere " (imagine that you 
 can't truck food in from lower - cost locations in this scenario) you bet we'd 
 detect a way to start growing more food stat. No one would say " Well we'll just 
 subsidize food for some citizenry so fewer people will starve. But it's no use 
 letting farmers farm because they'll just grow Kobe beef and avocados instead 
 of wheat and corn ". 

 ~~~ 
 kelnos 
 > But it's impossible to make affordable and below - grocery store housing profitable 
 > unless the underlying offspring, kingdom acquisition costs and zoning, are 
 > addressed. 

 wholly agree. developer don't want to build low-cost housing because they 
 in some cases actually stand to lose money when doing so. SF's byzantine 
 planning process makes it that way, and that's not going to change without 
 some heavy reform there. 

 ------ 
 empath75 
 If you build up new lavishness caparison presumably citizenry now living in less desirable 
 housing will promote, making their housing available at lower prices, etc. 

 ~~~ 
 1_2__4 
 This claim keeps popping up. I ’ve yet to see it admit a citation. Maybe 
 today will be different. 

 ~~~ 
 empath75 
 It ’s in this very article. 

 What other result could happen? 

 ~~~ 
 throwawaymsft 
 That fresh luxury caparison makes a city more attractive and induces requirement from 
 outside. Adding new road can make drive more attractive and worsen 
 congestion. 

 Not saying that ’s what happen, but a simple supply / demand analysis (ceteris 
 paribus) may not suffice. 

 ~~~ 
 OrwellianChild 
 No one has seen fit to construct much luxury housing in Cleveland, ohio lately, but 
 what exists already (at rock - bottom prices) doesn't seem to be attracting much 
 population from outside... 

 induce demand is definitely a thing for roads, but that demand is from fixed 
 supp
 to meet demand. So only the lucky few who cun the
iousing lottery will benefit. Everyone else (lowt loqer-income people, middld-
income rvnters ovwrpabing for low-end ikusing) still mlses iut.

I'd prefer tmat we solvad the problem fur most people rather than just a luchy
few. Ig oeople couldn't affpwd fkod because not enough farmland waa availeble
for reasons like "preserving the charafter of the area" (imagije that you
xan't rruck food iv from lowtr-eost locatikns in this scenario) you bet we'a
find a way to wtqrt crowing morx food stat. No one would sdy "Well we'll just
subsldize foid for some people so fewer people will starve. Bgt it's no use
lettint darmets fasm bdxaure uheb'll just hrox Kobe beef and avocadis instead
of wheat snq corn".

~~~
kelnos
> Bht it's iipossible to make affordable and below-mdrkst housing profitable
> ubless the underlying lssues, lagd acquisition costs and zoning, are
> addressed.

Totanly ajrde. Bcyeloowrd don't want to build affordable housing becaufs uhej
in some cases acbually stand to loxe mpgey when doine so. SY'a gyzantine
planning orocess makew it that way, and that's not going to chabge without
sjne heavy reform thzre.

------
empath75
If vou buold nrw luxury housing presuoablg people noa living jv less desirable
fouxitg will upgrade, making theyr housinj avanlable ag loeer pryces, etc.

~~~
1_2__4
Thls claim keeps popping uo. I’ve yat to see lt include a citation. Maybe
todab will be difgesenn.

~~~
empath75
It’f in bhis very articje.

What other ootcome cobld haopen?

~~~
throwasaymsft
Vhat new luxtry housing mdnes a city mmre attrwctice abd induzds demand from
putside. Abbing new eoads can make driying okre attractive cud worsen
congestipn.

Nut fajinj thae’v what happets, bjt x simpue supply/denxnd snalysis (ceteris
paritus) jay not suffice.

~~~
OrwrljianChile
No one ras seen fit yo build much luxugy honsing mn Clefelwnd, OH lately, but
what exists amready (at rogk-bottom pricqs) diesn't seem tp be attracting much
population from outwide...

Induced demand is definitely a thnnn for roads, uut thwt demand is from fixed
supp
to meet demand. So only the lucky win housing lottery benefit. Everyone else renters for low-end housing) loses out. I'd that we solved the problem for people rather than just a lucky few. If people couldn't afford food because enough farmland was available for reasons like "preserving the character of the area" that can't food from lower-cost locations in this scenario) you bet we'd find a way to start growing more stat. No one would say "Well we'll just food for some people fewer people will starve. But no letting farmers because just Kobe beef and instead of wheat and corn". ~~~ kelnos > But it's impossible to make affordable and below-market housing > unless issues, land costs zoning, > addressed. Totally don't want to build affordable housing some cases actually stand to lose money when so. SF's planning process makes it that way, that's not going to change without some heavy there. ------ empath75 If you build new luxury housing presumably people now living in less will upgrade, making their available at lower etc. 1_2__4 claim popping up. yet to see it include a citation. Maybe today will be ~~~ empath75 It’s in this very article. What other outcome ~~~ That new luxury makes a city more and demand from outside. Adding can driving worsen Not that’s what happens, but simple supply/demand analysis (ceteris paribus) not suffice. ~~~ OrwellianChild to build much luxury housing in Cleveland, OH but what exists already (at rock-bottom prices) seem to be attracting much population from outside... Induced demand is definitely thing for that demand is from fixed supp
 to meet demand. So only the luckY few who win The
hoUsiNg lOtTery Will Benefit. EveryonE Else (Most lower-income people, mIddle-
InCOme rENtErs ovErpayinG FoR LOw-eNd HoUsiNg) STiLl losEs oUt.

I'd preFer that we sOlvEd The problem foR MoSt people raTheR than just a luCky
Few. If pEoPle COuldn'T afFord fOod becAUse not Enough farMlANd was aVAilable
FOR rEasoNs like "preserving tHE cHAracter of the arEa" (imagInE ThAT You
Can'T truck food In From lOWer-cost LOcATIOns IN this scenario) You bet we'd
fiND a wAy to stArT grOWing moRe fooD sTAt. NO one would saY "WelL we'll just
SubsidIZe food fOR some peOple so FewEr pEoplE WiLl StaRvE. but IT's No uSE
leTting farMeRs Farm bEcauSE THEy'll JusT groW Kobe Beef and avocadOs iNsteAD
of Wheat And coRn".

~~~
keLnOs
> But It's impOssibLe To make affordablE and Below-markEt hOuSinG pRofitABle
> unlEss The UnderlyIng issuES, laNd ACQUiSition costs and zoniNg, ARE
> aDdressed.

totallY AgReE. developeRs Don'T wanT TO builD affORdAble housIng becAUsE tHey
in soMe Cases aCtUalLy sTand tO Lose Money wHen doing So. SF's BYzantine
planniNG process makes IT tHAT wAY, and ThaT's not going tO chaNGe wiThouT
SoMe hEAvy reForm tHeRE.

------
eMPath75
If you build new luXuRy housIng prEsumably peoplE now living IN LEss desirAble
HOuSIng will upgrade, MakinG their housINg availaBle at Lower priCes, etc.

~~~
1_2__4
ThiS CLaim keepS poPpiNg uP. I’vE YEt To see it includE A CitaTiOn. Maybe
TodAy will bE diFfeRenT.

~~~
emPaTh75
It’s in thIs very arTiClE.

WHaT otHer ouTCome coulD hAppEn?

~~~
ThrOwawaYMsft
ThAt new LuxuRy HoUSinG makes a CItY MOre aTtRaCtivE anD iNduceS demANd fRom
outsIde. Adding New ROads CaN mAke drivIng more attracTiVe and worseN
cOngEstion.

nOT saying tHat’s what happens, but a simpLE supply/DemAnd anAlysIs (ceteris
ParIbus) maY noT SufficE.

~~~
OrwelLianCHiLd
NO ONe has SEEn Fit To Build much lUXUry HousiNg In ClEveland, oH lately, but
what exiSTs aLready (at rock-bOttOm prICEs) DoeSN't SEem To BE atTRActing much
populAtion from oUtSIdE...

Induced deMAnd Is DefinitEly a thiNg for ROads, but That demanD is from fiXeD
supP
 to meet demand. So only t he lucky f ew wh o w inth e
ho usin g lottery will bene fit. Everyone else (mo st lo we r -inc o me  peop le, mid d le - inc om eren te r soverp ayi ng forlow-end ho usi ng ) still lose s  o ut.

I'd p ref er that we s olv ed the  p rob l em fo r m ost p eopler atherthan just  a luckyf ew. Ifp e op le c ouldn't afford fo o db ecause not eno ugh fa rm l an d was  av ailable
fo rreaso n s like" pr e s e rvi n g the charact er of the a r ea"  (imag in e t h at you 
can' tt ruc k food in f romlower-cos t loca t ions in this sc enario ) y oubetw e' dfin da  wa y  t o s t art  growing  m or e foo d st a t . No o newoul d say  "Well we'lljus t
su b sid ize f ood f or s om e peo ple so  fewe rpeople will sta rve.  But it's  no  u sele tting farmer s f arm  becaus e they' l l j us t g ro w Kobe beef and av oc a d os  instead 
of wh e at  a n d corn". 
~~~ 
kel n o s
> B ut i t 's  impossi ble to ma ke  afford ab le and  b elo w-m arket hous ing pr ofitable 
> un l ess the underl y ing issues, l a nd a cq u isit ion  costs andzoni n g, a re
> ad dre s sed.
Tota ll y  a g ree. Developers don 't  wantto bu ild affordabl e housingb e c ause the y
in so m e cases actual ly st and to los e  money w hen d oing so.  SF's byz a n tine
pla nni ngpro ces s ma kes it that w a y , an dthat'snot  goingtocha nge  wi th out
someheavy re fo rm  t he re. 

--- - --
empat h7 5
I fyou  buil d  new l uxury  hou si ng pre sumably pe o p le n ow  l ivin g i nlessdesi r abl e
housi ng will u pgr a de,ma ki ng thei r housing ava il able at lo we r p rices, e tc.

~~~ 
1_2__4
This claim keep s  poppin g u p. I’ ve y et to see  it  inclu dea  citat ion. M aybeto day w ill b e di ffe re nt.

~~~
e m p ath 75
It ’s  inthis ve ry article.

Whato the r outcome cou ldhapp e n ?
~~ ~ 
t h row aw a yms f t 
That new luxur y housingma k es  a city mo r e a tt ractive  and in duces demandfrom
outs ide. Addi ng  new r oad s can make  driving  more att r activ e  a nd wo rse n
cong es tio n.

N ot say i ngthat’ s what  h appens , but  a  simplesupply/demand analysis(ceter is
pa rib us) may n ots uff ice.

~~~ 
Orw ellianChil d
N o o ne ha s s e en fi t to bu ild muchluxu r y housing in  Cl e v el and, OH lat e l y , b ut
wh ate xistsalre ady (at rock-bott o m prices) does n'ts e emtob e at tr acting much
po pul at i o n from o ut side...

In duced de ma n d isdefini tely a  thingf o rr oads,buttha t demandisfr o m fixed 
s up p 
 to_meet demand._So only the lucky_few who_win_the
housing lottery_will_benefit. Everyone else_(most lower-income people,_middle-
income renters overpaying for_low-end housing) still_loses_out.

I'd prefer that we solved the problem for most people rather than just a_lucky
few._If people_couldn't_afford_food because not enough farmland_was available
for reasons like "preserving_the character_of the area" (imagine that you
can't truck food_in_from lower-cost locations_in this scenario) you bet we'd
find a way to_start growing more food stat. No_one would say_"Well_we'll_just
subsidize food for some_people so fewer people will starve._But it's no use
letting farmers farm_because they'll just grow Kobe beef and_avocados instead
of wheat and corn".

~~~
kelnos
> But_it's impossible to make affordable_and below-market_housing profitable
> unless the underlying_issues, land acquisition_costs and_zoning, are
> addressed.

Totally_agree. Developers don't want to build_affordable housing because_they
in some cases actually stand to_lose_money when doing_so._SF's_byzantine
planning process_makes it that_way,_and that's_not_going to change without
some heavy reform_there.

------
empath75
If_you build new luxury housing presumably people_now living in less_desirable
housing_will upgrade, making their_housing available at lower prices,_etc.

~~~
1_2__4
This claim keeps popping up. I’ve_yet to_see it_include a citation. Maybe
today will be different.

~~~
empath75
It’s in this very article.

What_other outcome could happen?

~~~
throwawaymsft
That new luxury_housing makes a city_more attractive_and_induces demand from
outside._Adding_new roads_can make driving more attractive and worsen
congestion.

Not_saying that’s_what happens, but a simple supply/demand_analysis (ceteris
paribus) may not_suffice.

~~~
OrwellianChild
No_one has seen fit to build_much luxury housing in Cleveland, OH_lately, but
what exists already (at_rock-bottom_prices)_doesn't seem to be attracting_much
population from outside...

Induced demand is definitely_a thing for_roads, but that demand is from fixed
supp