Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
More houses fixes the not enough houses problem...
It absolutely does NOT.
Short term (20-40yrs) until the excess can be tapered back:
Bunking up with others, renting out spare rooms in places with jobs (for those with needed skills)
and promoting relocation to the underpopulated older cities (for most of the rest).
As to construction... YES we will need to replace housing stock over time.
But if we can plan to end up with capacity for 250M ... we don't need to, don't WANT to, build for 450M+.
We especially don't need it when most of them won't be able to pay for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by biafra4life
It's a tricky balancing act. ...Japan and China did ...
They did it poorly. Can we learn from their errors? I sure hope so.
Frankly, if we CAN'T learn, can't moderate our population levels, do it better ... what prospects are we left with?
Last edited by MrRational; 03-21-2022 at 08:34 AM..
Short term (20-40yrs) until the excess can be tapered back:
Bunking up with others, renting out spare rooms in places with jobs (for those with needed skills)
and promoting relocation to the underpopulated older cities (for most of the rest).
As to construction... YES we will need to replace housing stock over time.
But if we can plan to end up with capacity for 250M ... we don't need to, don't WANT to, build for 450M+.
We especially don't need it when most of them won't be able to pay for it.
So you'd rather have 450M people fighting over capacity for 250M people and even MORE people unable to afford it?
Like I said, restricting capacity has NEVER worked ANYWHERE. If you want the entire country to become San Francisco, go right ahead though. I have mine, it's not going to affect me.
Well you can't stop people from moving here absent a massive overhaul of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
The only successful strategy for dealing with population growth is the growth of everything else to accommodate the population growth.
So we need to build more housing to accommodate them. This is a NOT ENOUGH HOUSES problem, not a too many people problem.
Yes and for them to have affordable housing, we must build MORE HOUSING NOW.
It absolutely is a too many people problem. With your thinking you just want to kick the can down the road.
When is enough going to be enough?
The more houses we build the more people will feel motivated to start families and fill those big houses with little people and the more houses we will need to build again. It’s a never ending cycle!
It absolutely is a too many people problem. With your thinking you just want to kick the can down the road.
When is enough going to be enough?
The more houses we build the more people will feel motivated to start families and fill those big houses with little people and the more houses we will need to build again. It’s a never ending cycle!
What's your alternative to reducing the population then?
What's your alternative to reducing the population then?
Enough is when Supply = Demand.
There is no alternative. There’s an absolute ceiling on how many people our country and economic system can support without sacrificing the quality of life of the over all population. You can print money but you can’t print healthy organic food, clean air, clean water, etc.
There is no alternative. There’s an absolute ceiling on how many people our country and economic system can support without sacrificing the quality of life of the over all population. You can print money but you can’t print healthy organic food, clean air, clean water, etc.
Since there is no realistic or palatable way to control population growth, the only alternative on the table is to grow the housing stock to accommodate population growth.
Since there is no realistic or palatable way to control population growth, the only alternative on the table is to grow the housing stock to accommodate population growth.
Hence, the problem being not enough houses.
By building more houses we are enabling the problem, so once again we are just kicking the can down the road. With a lower inventory it will force people to make use with what we already have. There’s plenty of ways to control population growth. Look at how easy it was to control and manipulate the population to wear masks during Covid.
By building more houses we are enabling the problem, so once again we are just kicking the can down the road. With a lower inventory it will force people to make use with what we already have. There’s plenty of ways to control population growth. Look at how easy it was to control and manipulate the population to wear masks during Covid.
"Oh yes I'm going to go have children because they're building more houses"......
.....said no one ever. And if we don't want people having children or starting families, how about we stop subsidizing them? Get rid of the child tax credit and other benefits for families, abolish filing statuses and tax everyone at MFJ brackets etc.
The only thing lower inventory does is make everything more miserable for homebuyers. Artificial scarcity helps no one. The only realistic solution here is to build more housing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
