• BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I know you don’t care about evidence, but for anyone reading who does, here’s a study from Helsinki.

    https://ideas.repec.org/p/fer/wpaper/146.html

    We study the city-wide effects of new, centrally-located market-rate housing supply using geo-coded total population register data from the Helsinki Metropolitan Area. The supply of new market rate units triggers moving chains that quickly reach middle- and low-income neighborhoods and individuals. Thus, new market-rate construction loosens the housing market in middle- and low-income areas even in the short run. Market-rate supply is likely to improve affordability outside the sub-markets where new construction occurs and to benefit low-income people.

    Turns out there may be a meaningful difference between randomly cutting taxes from businesses and building a bunch of new housing.

      • Lexi Sneptaur@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Seattleite here. We also focused on supply side housing issues. We passed a ballot initiative last year that allows the city to establish its own housing developer which will compete with capital to build public housing.

        It’s a supply side issue AND a capitalist greed issue. Don’t listen to this person.

      • Bipta@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The paper came out before that investigation was opened, so unless the paper is wrong, you’re probably wrong.