Trump vs. Harris: How They Would Solve the Housing Crisis | WSJ

[@wsj]

Pennsylvania has already become ground zero for election-fraud claims: on.wsj.com/4hpfpWB

[@RisenThe]

Rupert Murdoch owns WSJ, NY Post, and Fox News. They try to hide this, but you deserve to know.

[@who2u333]

Huge shock

[@xiphoid2011]

The biggest hurdle is clearly the NIMBYs, which are the majorityof home owners. And since most of Americans are home owners, thats ALOT of NIMBYs. All other issues can be solved but nobody dares to go against the NIMBYs because they vote so politicians on both sides doesn't dare to offend them.

[@ayoCC]

Make laws to take power away from NIMBY If I had to quickly come up with a proposal I'd say, maybe there's a way to give that power to a regional institution that isn't the elected officials, but a chamber of city planners. Allow for unnaffordable apartment complexes too, because they will increase the housing supply. Weaken the NIMBYs using past strategies: concentrate on weak and poorer regions, push them around and push them out of their homes, build high density housing there, and develop good schools and let a 30+ year gentrification plan unfold. As for established suburbian NIMBY, try to encourage rich foreign investors to push our the local residents and break up HOAs, then rezone the lots when the locals are gone, and the foreign agents have no real power.

[@AKAAAK]

​@ayoCC Again, politicians don't dare offend their NIMBY voters. Will NEVER happen......next idea.

[@HeliosHarish7]

Your logic makes little sense- if “most” Americans already have homes then we wouldn’t have the demand side pressure to buy more houses. A better argument and the fact is that most Americans don’t own homes; but almost all homeowners are NIMBY’s because it’s a vicious cycle. Plus no one wants to live next to someone with old car parts lying in their yard! 😂

[@AKAAAK]

@HeliosHarish7 100%. For those homeowners that take pride in where they live and their community, they don't want riffraff running the streets of their neighborhoods.

[@johnd2058]

Trump ran appealing to them in 2020.

[@mnaeseth24]

I’m a builder and it’s very expensive in Houston. $20k in permits that’s before even putting a single rock on the land

[@michaelwinland8378]

Finally content that covers actual issues and ways to improve on them without having biases.

[@drixvy731]

I noticed that with this vid, they’ve been uploading videos regarding the elections for the last couple weeks but I really only realized just now they want to keep people informed regardless of the candidate, in order to make a good voting decision

[@timb350]

The WSJ did a survey of top economists and over 60% said Trump's plan was far worse for the economy than Harris's plan.

[@FuadOrko]

they are not talking about demand side but only talking about supply side. which is disingenous truthful reporting.

[@scottmcshannon6821]

neither politician said anything useful.

[@MarkusGebhard]

First time home buyers grant is going to backfire massively!! Australia did that years ago. It only increases house prices the moment that policy is implemented. If buyers have more money, sellers will ask for more money. As simple as that.

[@goodfortunetoyou]

If they're giving me more money than the price increase, I'm fine with that. I still get housing for cheaper.

[@Awesome-odavidson]

100 percent. Its a band aid that's going to cause all kinds of problems.

[@kaiefalam]

@@goodfortunetoyou and that is just not going to be the case

[@NikolaiThielepape]

@@kaiefalam elaborate

[@alexander15551]

And when the house price increases, it also increases the debt burden, property taxes, and maybe insurance. So, it actually makes the problem a lot worse for homebuyers

[@anthonygomez9686]

It's all about excessive public hearings and overly strict zoning laws. In some areas of the country even modest triplexes can get stuck in the approval process for years. During that time the builder is paying interest on their loans without being able to build and that cost gets passed on to buyers or renters. Public hearings should be reserved only for large projects.

[@Semper_Iratus]

Nope.

[@elijaha773]

Yes! Uytae Lee did a great video about this. I didn't realize the length of the process can cost developers millions of dollars. kzbin.info/www/bejne/jp-ph6mvqpetfbssi=Ctvd9UCTQByDKolJ

[@Blub_525]

Dam what a good video I'm sure the comments will be peaceful. 😊

[@tackaerep]

How about stopping big investments firms into buying family houses? Some things shouldn't be invesments in this country, and that's also what also home owners need to understand, their home price increasing isn't heping them at all because everything else is also increasing, not only their home price!

[@IceTank]

Most investments are private equity. Meaning retirement savings or private shareholders. Try telling some middle-aged family, Dad, that he is not allowed to invest his retirement saving. It's all a big bubble funded by debt, and everyone is invested in it.

[@Censortubes]

@@tackaerep but then this stops the elite.

[@mistermood4164]

Only .05% of homes is bought by large investment firms

[@HarrisonEngel-wr5uy]

Because it doesn’t matter, it’s not impacting home prices in most markets. I know the it gives an easy bad guy to point to, it’s easy to point at some vague unknown rich people and say “it must be them!” but it just doesn’t matter. You would ban this and see absolutely 0 change in house prices, and just add more red tape.

[@Censortubes]

@ govbot post.

[@jeffw4972]

Remove all tax incentives from people who own more than one house.

[@zacharyharris1393]

As a first-time homebuyer, it's a nightmare process. Extremely long, complex and expensive. Housing prices keep going up and up, especially in my area because there is no where left to build, especially because of NIMBY situations. I'm glad I got in now because there's no end in sight on prices rising. Before we even disclosed the purchase price, Zillow was already estimating the home value 20k more than we bought it for, and it only took a month. I really emphasize with people looking right now because I was just there and it's only getting more cut throat.

[@putradfr]

Don't simply retire from something; have something to retire to. Start saving, keep saving, and stick to investments

[@tammarasietsema]

It’s really heartbreaking to see how inflation and recession impact low-income families. The cost of living keeps rising, and many struggle just to meet basic needs, let alone save or invest. It’s a reminder of the importance of finding ways to create financial opportunities. You've helped me a lot sir Brian! Imagine i invested $50,000 and received $190,500 after 14 days

[@DeborahJackson-v2t]

Absolutely! Profits are possible, especially now, but complex transactions should be handled by experienced market professionals.

[@PatG-xd8qn]

As always, North Americans don't want to face the real problem, which is urban sprawl/lack of density. The problem in North America is that we build our homes as if land was unlimited, but it's not. All land around cities is already saturated by single-family homes, huge highways and parking lots everywhere. This makes that the few lands left are insanely expensive.

[@ISpitHotFiyaa]

That's actually not the problem at all. The cities with lots of sprawl have the cheapest housing. The places with the most expensive housing are places with growth management - which is a policy put in place to force density on a region.

[@PatG-xd8qn]

@ISpitHotFiyaa That's a completely baseless statement. All North American cities, even small towns, have insane urban sprawl. Cities in North America that are cheap are cheap because fewer people want to live there. Not because of urban sprawl. Urban sprawl is what makes land so expensive, but also the maintenance of all road infrastructures

[@goodfortunetoyou]

Didn't trump impose the lumber tariffs on canadian lumber? I'm pretty sure he did.

[@taylorlibby7642]

You're only telling part of the story, either deliberately or because you're ignorant of the full story. Canadian lumber producers were dumping their product into the U.S. market far below their own cost of production in order to undercut U.S. producers and capture market share by driving the U.S. producers out of business. Canadian lumber producers are also heavily subsidized by the Canadian government. U.S. lumber producers are not subsidized by the U.S. government.

[@goodfortunetoyou]

@@taylorlibby7642 The latter, rather than the former. It's infeasible to pay detailed attention to everything. Regardless, tariffs are the wrong approach in that scenario. The proper counter to Canada would have been to either buy the lumber off them cheap, and let developers profit off their intentional underpricing, or it would be to subsidize the American lumber industry proportional to what the Canadians are, keeping our industry alive and competitive. Both of those approaches would have lead to lower prices for lumber, and avoided the current problem created by tariffs in terms of higher input costs to housing.

[@joshxkerrigan]

@@taylorlibby7642 you trying to justify the cost of a product going up purely because it was the cheapest around is asinine, to say the least. Tariffs don’t work and this is the direct effect of them. Costs go up for consumers. This is the ONLY way trickle down economics has EVER worked.

[@Misaka-gt5yj]

Democrats want to push for rent control which always disincentivizes development and building of new housing, causing higher prices of existing housing due to simply supply and demand.

[@dachosens1]

just tariff canadian lumber at the level that the canadian government is subsidizing them? its not that hard to comprehend to have industries to be at a level playing field - sure you are "harming" consumers, but you are also benefiting american lumber, which is not propping up an unsustainable buisness that could be better achieved elsewhere but evening the playing field

[@carl3063]

I’m very skeptical of additional funding unless its to subsidize building costs associated with all of the regulation. We need to get rid of the tariffs and find other ways of lowering material costs. Then we need to change regulations on environmental, zoning, and building requirements to reduce building time and costs associated with more expensive resources and processes.

[@ngrader]

Trump plan: Fix housing costs in Philly, by opening up Federal Lands in Nevada. 4Z Chess.

[@BusyBodyVisa]

Yeah that's not what he said

[@ak1342able]

​@@BusyBodyVisawhat did he say?

[@Genebriss]

People can move between states so what's your point?

[@libiroli]

Great video. Hats off to the graphics teams -- looks great and helps with so many moving pieces. Upvoted and subscribed.

[@uvaionballer]

Half the video talked about regulations as the driver for the costs, we should cut those regulations. Giving extra money is just going to increase the price the seller asks for a house so that isnt going to work.

[@somone755]

And Trumps wants to add a 20% tariff on all goods? Including lumber? Anyway, I like Kamala's program that encourage more trade work. We need more people not in tech jobs.

[@taylorlibby7642]

Tariffs are meant for imported goods. Most lumber used in the U.S. is produced in the U.S.

[@Glowie34765]

Stupid GovBot. We don't import lumber.

[@floridaman7]

Kamala is going to give new buyers 25k for a down payment. The price for homes will go up. 😂

[@Charlie43348]

@@Glowie34765 Yes you do lol. And a lot

[@overeasy4175]

You people doubled the prices of groceries in just 18 months.

[@mikeshafer]

Maybe also restrict foreign buyers from purchasing homes in the US. How about we also abolish residential REITs and force them to sell their assets over 10 years? I love the idea of REITs but in practice it really just drives up the cost of homes and limits supply.

[@sanahtlig]

Helping people with their downpayment makes zero sense. The whole point of the downpayment is to illustrate that the buyer has surplus income/assets, which assures the creditor that they'll pay back the loan. The government assisting with the downpayment only helps if the government is also pitching in to pay back the loan; otherwise it's just contributing to inflation.

[@valtonen77]

The purpose of it is to help people starting off. When given chance to build more wealth people will generally be able to do that. How well off would've you been if your parents tossed you out when you were 14 to fend off for yourself?

[@pilot88pro]

​@@valtonen77 it's honestly sad that you actually belive that. If you gave millions of people $25k, homes will go up by at least $25k. The total amount of homes remain the same. Increasing the money supply & demand, and there's only one outcome. It's truly pathetic.

[@stwtn]

Great video! Very well structured. Do more of these please!

[@Skilliard]

Subsidies to first time homebuyers just lead to increased prices, because in a scarce market, all of the buyers are bidding with each other, and limited only by what they can afford. It's ultimately a handout to home owners, who will see larger proceeds for their sale, not buyers. The rest of Harris plan seems smart. Part of me wonders if she is smart enough to know that the $25,000 subsidy proposal is a bad idea, and is only advocating for it because she knows it will get her votes.

[@AraP24]

Impact and school fees should be illegal. Especially school fees.

[@mason2044]

Why don't they build more apartments? plenty of people would happily live in a 500sqft apartment alone, then share a 2000sq ft house with parents or a roomates.

[@taylorlibby7642]

Zoning codes are actively used to prevent multi-unit development.

[@pierren___]

Short term solution that cause more problem due to social welfare taxes.

[@janaroow]

mainly because that lands zoning only allows for single family homes to be build. if they changed the zoning (and minimum parking requirements), you could build an apartment building with space for way more people, but neighbors fear that their properties might decrease in value because of it.

[@jasonmerrill8917]

You have to have the infrastructure for high density housing. You can't just throw hundreds of people in a tight area and not expect traffic issues, insufficient supply/services, etc.

[@chrisjohnson6138]

​@@janaroowit is a legitimate fear though, if you own a home especially in a nice area and you bring in low income housing or apartments, your property value goes down that is a fact. Especially low income housing. I'm not paying half a million dollars or more on a house so bunch of bombs can live next to me

[@rwc22]

Build all you want, big corporations will buy all of it if it’s not regulated.

[@davidkelvin5856]

Yes give away free $25,000. I’m sure people wont see it as being able to charge $25,000 more for their house.

[@valtonen77]

Better not raise wages either because clearly everyone will just raise prices

[@sepehr20626]

It won’t because it’s only for first time home buyers and not everyone. The hardest thing for first time homebuyers is the downpayment and keeps them away from becoming a home owners. This helps first time home buyers but because it’s only eligible for a small group of people, so minimal impact on rising house prices but huge impact on affordability

[@doug138fkazi2n9]

Too many people going into college not enough builders

[@ISpitHotFiyaa]

Anyone who thinks that a California Democrat will make housing more affordable needs to get their head examined. I mean have they never been to California?

[@John-tx5or]

Build UP: Brownstone The Burbs, Out Back: Tiny Shed House, Down in rhe Back: Yard Basements.

[@OneManOnFire]

Trump was in office 4 years ago and homes are still expensive. I highly doubt both of them will do anything.

[@Censortubes]

@@OneManOnFire how to tell everyone you are a child who don’t own a thing.

[@NPAMike]

Housing was cheap under trump and interest were low.

[@weirengan440]

@@NPAMike He took over an amazing economy from Obama and still manage to screw it all up.

[@OneManOnFire]

@@NPAMike Housing was still expensive regardless

[@Censortubes]

@@OneManOnFire if you are poor.

[@venox3811]

One thing the WSJ didn’t talk about was to keep hedge fund managers away from buying entire neighborhoods.

[@gatzt3r]

Because that is not as big an issue. What little research I've done shows hedge funds and rich private investors own relatively small amount of homes. It really boils down to supply and demand. Vox has a good video on it.

[@mikeb5664]

@@gatzt3r As of June 2022, institutional investors owned roughly 574,000 single-family homes in the United States, which is about 3.8% of the country's single-unit rental properties. This number is based on the definition of an institutional investor as an entity that owns at least 100 single-family homes.

[@InvisibleHotdog]

​@@mikeb5664 those homes are usually concentrated, driving up priced area by area

[@venox3811]

@ most estimates indicate 30% before the rate hikes. That’s way too high in my opinion.

[@sereinova]

In 1800s Americans would conquer more land to solve housing issues, in 1900s new city, subdivisions were built to solve housing issues, in 2000s can’t we dream bigger, and do things beyond debating some policies?

[@MeowLo-tk3rm]

You mean to invade others so america would have more lands?

[@kiwifruitkl]

Does it really have to be lumber? No. We can build homes out of concrete/cement, and it will be much sturdier than lumber. The cost of concrete/cement . . .

[@gilbertthefish1]

bro has clearly never built a house

[@taylorlibby7642]

Depends entirely on where in the U.S. you're talking of building. And concrete/cement housing isn't automatically more durable.

[@gulapula]

Problem : Costs of building homes are too much Solution : Replace the affordable lumber with costly and labor intensive cement and concrete 🤔

[@MeowLo-tk3rm]

We built with concrete, i dont know why u guys cannot 😗

[@altercaze]

25k just goes straight to the price tag, right? Sellers will just raise their price.

[@definitely_not_a_robot]

Probably not because, in Harris’ plan, there are so many requirements that very few homebuyers will actually receive the $25k. Your parents can’t own a home and it has to be your first home. If your parents own a home, but you’re a first time homebuyer, you get $10k. How long will the verification process take? How much will verification cost the government? Probably too long and too much. Then again, while Harris’ plan has faults, Tramp’s plan is utterly braindead. It’s attempting to solve manhattan’s housing shortage by opening up Nevada’s federal lands for development. Housing affordability depends on local and state policies. As the video said, the federal government only affects it at the margins.

[@pugbug288]

I need low income housing in my backyard. I’m sure the HOA McMansion behind me won’t mind.

[@iseeblood209]

Stop corporations from buying single family homes..the ones that are already bought that are 5yrs old or newer must be sold no more then 10k then the purchase price. Problem solved

[@kiwifruitkl]

The property taxes of the affluent can be used to finance affordable housing for poorer people, community parks, playgrounds, public libraries, public schools, local roads, etc.

[@taylorlibby7642]

Silly idea. The "affluent" already pay outrageous taxes, and the definition of "affluent" keeps getting redefined downwards. At a certain point there's simply no more juice left to squeeze from the fruit.

[@avandurion]

Or we save ourselves that money, and don't build any of those, additional benefit we do not need to spend money in the future on upkeep, and citizens have money left in their pockets(the productive ones) to get better quality services from private sector🤷‍♂️

[@Jeremiahking101]

"it shouldn't be pushed down to the local level"!!!!!! BIG RED FLAG!!! This country is all about a decentralized government!! If a small community votes that they don't want development in their zones then they are allowed to do that. The US is massive and has miles of land. Go build your next suburbia where a community isn't already established. Leave the little guy alone.

[@FeronTheRaccon]

Who is taking up the supply? It’s not like the population has grown significantly. The ones taking up the supply are corporations renting homes back to people for significantly more than the mortgage would have been for the renters. All the home management companies are colluding to raise prices at the same time since there’s so few. The solution is more homes and to ban corporations from ever owning homes and force the sale of corporate owned homes.

[@markdavis8888]

We have plenty of houses for everyone but too many sit vacant. We need to stop the second/third/forth.. home market tax deductions. Only long term rentals or your primary home should get tax benefits. Vacant second homes should be charged a surplus property tax.

[@WillieFungo]

No one owes you their vacant home. Stop being jealous

[@johngorman6641]

Unused second homes are typically outside of the places with the major housing crises. We need to upzone single family neighborhoods near transit, good schools, and jobs.

[@jumbomuffin1316]

@@WillieFungojealous of people with 2-3 houses using their collateral to buy more houses? They’re no different than Wall Street

[@johngorman6641]

NIMBYs are to blame for so many of the major problems in the U.S.

[@ISpitHotFiyaa]

The problem there is really more about NEPA - which the federal government could repeal. The problem isn't that there are people opposed to new developments near their homes. I mean that's nothing new or US-specific. The problem is that we give those people a way to block and delay those developments. Bogus environmental review lawsuits are their primary means for doing that.

[@johngorman6641]

@@ISpitHotFiyaa Yes but those same people also elect local and state politicians opposed to rezoning. Repealing NEPA would be amazing but most duplexes don't go through the NEPA process.

[@Vyrus_101]

Still no talk about private companies that own all the property like Redfin and the like. Also nothing about taxing people much much higher that own more than one or two homes?

[@gulapula]

We need to ban private equity from buying residential properties period.

[@jamesgreer323]

One thing that needs to change that the government cant effect is attitude. Housing is seen as an investment more than anything. Also NIMBYs prevent new houses from being built

[@dan1142]

That’s what this video is about

[@alastairhewitt380]

TLDR: They won't

[@Jay-nk6dm]

Minneapolis, and Austin are two great examples. They reduced the regulatory burden of zoning, and voila, more building and a reduction of rent or at least stabilization.

[@cosmo8840]

Trump wouldn’t fix the housing crisis are you joking

[@robcel402]

do you think kamala will?

[@Misaka-gt5yj]

Democrats want to push for rent control which always disincentivizes development and building of new housing, causing higher prices of existing housing due to simply supply and demand. Anyone is better than the Democrats

[@johnnywang206]

Kamala is gonna fix it by bringing in another 20 million migrants.

[@XandateOfHeaven]

The biggest problem here is that this is a crisis requiring solutions at all levels of government, state, local and federal. This makes it especially challenging to solve, especially since postive results will take years, and no politician wants credit to be taken by someone else.

[@Maxime_K-G]

Going 3D with apartments (not everywhere, just enough of them in key locations) is the only way to solve this for good. Somehow people understand this when it comes to highway interchanges but not when it comes to homes. 😒

[@TheRedishFire99]

Need to build dense housing, it has worked in other countries. Single family homes were a stupid idea from the start.

[@mr.spockchap1345]

Disappointed that WSJ didn't even mention the inherent inefficiencies of single family homes -- just building a bunch of single family homes away from the cities (where the most demand is) will not solve the pricing issues within the cities, and will promote the further development of harmful car infrastructure. More focus needs to be on constructing "missing middle" housing types within major metropolitan regions

[@DawnToDawn]

Higher home price means more property tax revenue for local governments, so why would governments want lower home prices ?

[@davidmata3992]

Good Report

[@Jeorgy92]

To recap theres too much bureaucracy before building anything

[@DeGoya]

nothing will change with all the lobbying of home owners and companies like black rock. Politicians want to keep the rich rich, that's how they stay in power...

[@Zindo.Majesty.HisMajesty]

No building inspection equals cut corners.

[@RealEstateDecoded]

Prices are determined by supply AND demand. End all the zillion tax breaks we give landlords of single-family homes and watch home ownership increase FOR FREE. Our investor tax breaks essentially pay investors to buy single-family homes away from live-in owners, and drive up home prices.

[@sumanthchebolu9299]

Will boxabl solve the problem?

[@Raphael-y9g]

Trying to buy a house for 3 yrs now and prices skyrocket. I missed the bus.

[@amac2612]

same as in the us as it is in Canada, in Australia and the UK. stop big investment firms from owning family homes. build more mixed use developments, townhouses, units, 3 level apartment buildings, attached bigger row houses. All we build in Australia are these huge sub developments of single family homes in culd de sacs 2 hours drive from the city with no public transport, no access to shops or amenities, yet its the only thing they build so people have to buy them.

[@Levicard088]

Not much mention of institutional investors using real estate as an investment vehicle. They have no interest in making housing more affordable. Quite the opposite in fact.

[@FuadOrko]

It's disingenuous to only talk about the supply side (lack of homebuilding capacity) but totally ignore the demand side (too much immigration in a short time)

[@cwaddle]

It’s not only house price, just look at the stock market. Everything is trading at a ridiculous multiple. ITS all due to the pivot in the central bank policy since 2008 where they switch the mode of infinitely printing out money to save businesses, and never getting that back because they don’t want to be seen as creating unemployment and recession. As a result the money supply rocketed up and that money has nowhere to go but to cause aset price inflation, but rich people ensures that that money never trickles down into ordinary peoples wallet so that poor gets poorer and Rich get richer

[@dcl97]

As I builder I don't see either policies as being helpful. My biggest costs now are land development (not the land itself) and dealing with all the new codes and regulations. Undeveloped land is still fairly cheap in all my markets, labor and materials have gone up for sure, but that's not a significant cost driver. Taking 2-3 years to even get started building because of zoning, permitting is what costs. In some areas we have to go through 5 different local, state and federal agencies just to start moving dirt.

[@adambram]

This is what happens when corporations can buy unlimited numbers of residential rental property. It won't be solved unless we prevent that from happening. Put some kind of tax on any corporation or individual who own more than [PICK A NUMBER] rental properties. I don't know what that number is, which is why I said it that way, but it's clear that corporations caused this problem.

[@JZTechEngineering]

Currently we don't have enough rentals, you certainly won't be helping with that problem

[@adambram]

@@JZTechEngineering That's not the root cause of the problem; it's a symptom. There are more renters than homes because we created a situation where people cannot afford to buy. You don't solve that by creating more homes that are allowed to be gobbled up by corporations. You solve it by preventing corporations from buying hundreds to thousands of homes. It isn't that there isn't enough housing. It's that there isn't enough affordable housing in the country, and that is because real estate has been promoted as an investment. Massive investment in residential real estate inflates prices of homes and rents. Shelter inflation is caused by this feedback loop. There must be a policy end to it because if there isn't then we will eventually see a collapse. I can see a situation similar to 2008 happening again.

[@JZTechEngineering]

@ even if we manage to get the price decreases you want mom and pop landlords will still just buy up the extra homes. You also still didn't adress the fact that for most reasonable prices you simply can get poor people to be able to afford them in any scinerio because banks won't lend them the money.

[@adambram]

@@JZTechEngineering That is true and is not a problem. Mom and pop landlords aren't the cause of this issue. Removing huge corporations from buying far too many will decrease demand and lower prices (or keep prices in check). Eventually, wages will catch up with housing prices, but you have to stop the drastic increases in shelter inflation for that to happen, you have to strip the incentives for corporations to invest in residential rental property. When people think the market will fix itself, look at the game of Monopoly. It ends when all of the other players lose their property, become renters, and go bankrupt. It ends. Even the winner loses if the game were allowed to go on after everyone loses everything. You have to view the economy as a system. For that system to work, money has to flow through it. That's why a Monopoly game ends. Money stopped flowing. If money kept flowing to the other players, the game would go on indefinately, and the other players wouldn't be forced to sell their properties. That's fine in a game, but it's not what we want in a real economy.

[@kirkhaskell9179]

Bro forgor immigration. Supply and demand.

[@ayoCC]

Delays due to lack of inspectors should have a maximum of 2 weeks, and if they miss their deadline, the house can move ahead without the clearance. If there's violations in hindsight, they should be allowed to bill their employer, the state, for failing to provide the correct number of inspectors

[@taylorlibby7642]

That's a prescription for shoddy construction and an explosion of lawsuits. Just hire more inspectors.

[@ayoCC]

@taylorlibby7642 there's gonna have to be pressure somewhere for it to happen. Maybe at least let the builders bill the government for the time that was delayed, and making it basically more expensive to have big delays than hiring more inspectors

[@kinghenry100]

Both want mass legal immigration so demand will continue to outpace supply. Prices will rise.

[@joshxkerrigan]

How did you get that? Trump has been boasting about deporting 20 million “undocumented immigrants” and closing the border. Did you get hit on the head or something?

[@Kelfuma]

You could limit the amount of homes a family/person can own. Maybe 2 or 3 at most. Landowners leasing out their houses for rent is a very good way to earn passive income so there is an incentive for wealthy landowners to buy homes to rent out.

[@Hellanissan7]

Reduce or remove the tariffs on Canadian lumber being imported until we have the housing numbers we need.

[@fateenshareef8716]

Solving NIMBY's to solve the housing crisis is such a prisoners dilemma. They need to put aside their individual wants aside and work together for the common good and all in a democratic system which rewards majority popularity. My guess is that the situation will get a lot worse till the point that NIMBY'S are over powered in numbers and discourse ( like in the UK currently). And then we'll have building at scale.

[@dimon22323]

Oh, good luck solving zoning problem. You can do anything, but if people in living in X place are not interested in more houses its going to be as usual - impossible to sit on two chairs. There's a clear conflict of interest that you will have to accept breaking contract with society if u want to solve it. That said, its the homeowners usually that are voting, so until that changes, its unlikely thing will turn in opposite direction.

[@jowens3975]

I can solve it tomorrow. Stop letting corporations buy residential property. Done

[@dailyrant4068]

Key things: 1) Around 1:30 when the video talks about protesters. Very true on anything from environment to zoning regulations. People love to just blame everything on govenrment process but this is what you asked for... you want democracy then it means people can go protest no matter how stupid or incorrect you think it is. You can't have the cake and eat it too... you laugh at Chinese citizens not having freedom but when it's your turn you want to shut down opposition voices. See the irony? (Not talking to anyone specific, just in general for those that love chanting government sucks) 2) 2:40 About infrastructure cost. Exactly, infrastructure is very expensive to build/maintain. To the far right folks that think government needs to go away, who exactly pays for infrastructure like roads? Amazon might be willing to build a few roads that connect the city to their mega warehouse, but most businesses aren't going to be able to organize efforts to connect pipes, roads, etc. People often discount infrastructure as if it was free born out of the air or that it can simply be pritivized which anyone with common sense knows you can't... there's no profit motive behind it. Only government can say, we need to connect all these areas whether it has a mom&pop shop or if it's a Walmart which obviously produces different economic values. I don't think anyone would argue only walmart should get roads. 3) 4:45 Another classic example of Trump meaning well but his supporters aren't seeing reality. It sounds nice to open up federal land but it doesn't help if it's not where housing shortage is, does it? He also talks about protecting single family zoning but this is actually what kills cities like SF. To be 100% fair, democrat voters are just as guilty in this. They vote against any non-SF zoning to protect their own SF there. Anyone who insists on SF zoning only, are the folks that make housing crisis worse. 4) 5:50 Example of Harris meaning well but aren't attacking the core issue. Incentive for first time buyer doesn't solve the problem and why should people who are moving from home to home not be able to afford houses? It's like affirmative action that means well but don't hold up in real world logic. 5) Both sides need to listen to actual experts that talk about tariff on lumber, zoning to be eased, and trade labor to go up. I don't see any voters from either side doing much besides following their candidates blindly.

[@PaulHo]

Can there be childless zones so school zones aren't a thing?

[@johngorman6641]

What?

[@ISpitHotFiyaa]

They exist. They're called 55 and up communities.

[@cowboiturtle8865]

How about progressive and sensible zoning laws. Investment in public transport and pedestrian walk-ability also helps

[@jasonmorris9330]

trump solve something? The jokes write themselves right?

[@quentinmanson3287]

It would’ve been helpful if you could’ve explained how energy plays a role. It affects the cost of the building material to be made. It affects the cost of delivery of the building material to be made, which increases the price of the building material itself.

[@vicwiseman6038]

Handing out money for down payment assistance to first time homebuyers will only increase the cost of housing. Builders need incentives and zoning to be fixed.

[@CensoredMercy]

NIMBY Replace traditional tax with Land Tax

[@rimfire8217]

What We Need Is A LAND VALUE TAX. Henry George was Right.

[@grigory_m]

In Russia, there is no problem with housing, as there is plenty of new apartments. But the problem is that people do not have any say in local government and corrupt officials allocate land for monstrous apartment blocs without any infrastructure. Changing the zoning may result in this overcrowding in the US, too.

[@Misaka-gt5yj]

You can afford to build out of concrete and bricks instead of lumber. Enough with the lumber, especially in fire prone states.

[@gulapula]

Concrete and brick is significantly more difficult and costly to build with. There are very few highly skilled bricklayers in the United States compared to Europe. The cost of materials being cheaper is significantly offset by the skilled labor costing much more than equivalent laborers used in building with lumber. If it was truly the case that concrete and or brick was a cheaper solution at the end of the day, developers would be using brick and concrete. In the United States, unlike Europe, developers 9/10 will choose the cheapest solution available, thus we use lumber.

[@ccmuclamba]

Why doesn’t anyone ever challenge Harris’ plan to give first time, first generation homeowners a pile of cash? What effect does that have on home prices and is it constitutional?

[@bassistheplace246]

Stop sane washing Trump and holding him to the same standard as Harris

[@johnnywang206]

Stop sane washing Kamala by holding her to the same standard as Trump. Where are her fact checks everytime she repeats the Charlottesville hoax? Why hasn’t she been forced to explain her extreme views on gun grabbing and taxpayer funded transgender surgery for migrants?

[@Basic-wm8uf]

Kamala’s plan is to tackle the problem from multiple sides, which is what will bring balance and sustainability on this initiative. One and done thing doesn’t work with such complex issues. Kamala 2024 and Beyond!

[@Sjalabais]

Who came up with the idea to toll Canadian lumber? That's only hurting Americans. And where does that tax go? Infrastructure & schools?

[@14x7j4]

Nimby's are more active in local government, safe to assume they're also active presidential voters, local government officials won't oppose their majority supporter base sentiment because then they'll lose their cushy easy money desk jobs.

[@Joelmonterrey]

I remember watching Dave Chappelle blocking a new subdivision. I never hated that man more than I did just then. I like him, but now I cannot like him. We need more housing. We need to deal with the NIMBY problem. There are so many and many, or most, are so petty.

[@tfustudios]

How much do building permits cost?

[@baltakatei]

Example of NIMBYs: the existence single-family homes blanketing the central areas of San Diego and Los Angeles. Justification for being a NIMBY: real estate speculation. Solution for NIMBYs: require people to actually reside in their residential properties; private equity housing corporations would be broken up, but good riddance.

[@mack-uv6gn]

That chart of federal land, not many people would live there

[@Brazillianboi69]

The problem is simple. Zoning.

[@DiegoMarquesBrazil]

WHAT??? WSJ reporters don't know how to read basic graphs??? It didn't mean prices were low, just that they were getting a little cheaper or with a more moderate rise!!

[@morpheus4445]

Investment properties are a significant contributor that is not mentioned.

[@Maxime_K-G]

Why should people not have the right to own multiple homes? People own multiple cars yet we're not running out of those. Besides, how could renters find a place to live then?

[@kiwifruitkl]

In the novel Little Fires Everywhere by Celeste Ng, a family lives in a duplex home with 2 apartments--one down and one up. It is a rental home, and rentals are perceived to be lower in value--probably because it is associated with poor people and the fact that they can't afford a home. And rich people want to price them out. I think that's a good idea, though. Yeah, we can do a multi-family building on the inside, but on the outside, it looks like a single-family home so people will be fooled into thinking that everyone is rich here.

[@patrickle2500]

We need more homes. Not laws

[@Jeorgy92]

None of the plans will work, but Kamala will at least try

[@AKAAAK]

Both candidates spouting out BS wet dreams. None of this can be done without congress approval, and we know all too well how they get along 😅

[@45414]

The answer: NEITHER candidate can solve the housing crisis.

[@joshxkerrigan]

One of them is directly behind the cost of lumbar going up during his presidency… you clearly didn’t pay attention to the video.

[@Misaka-gt5yj]

@@joshxkerrigan Democrats want to push for rent control which always disincentivizes development and building of new housing, causing higher prices of existing housing due to simply supply and demand. You clearly understood nothing fool

[@whatisrealknowtheformula6137]

This is so laughably erroneous that I’m surprised it isn’t stamped with a warning. Maybe mention the millions of houses now for sale but priced outrageously? Maybe mention the stockholders sitting on empty properties. This is an add for Wall Street… oh,.. WSJ… got it.

[@GrantDWilliams82]

The supply isn’t low. There’s plenty of housing. The problem is all of the government policies that make it possible for Boomers to hoard houses that, in an actual free market, they’d have had to sell long ago.