标题: Housing; Room for Improvement [打印本页] 作者: choi 时间: 4-24-2019 15:47 标题: Housing; Room for Improvement (1) Housing in Britain | Room for Improvement; The outrageous cost of housing constrains the economy and poisons politics. Economist, Aug 5, 2017 (in "Leaders" section) https://www.economist.com/leader ... ains-housing-crisis
("The ratio of median house prices to earnings in England hit 7.7 in 2016, its highest recorded level. In the past four decades house prices have grown by more in Britain than in any other G7 country. * * * Britain needs to get building. The consensus is that, to keep prices in check, it must put up 300,000 houses a year, double what it erected in 2015-16. Mr [Jeremy] Corbyn[, leader of Labour Party since 2015] says the answer is a huge expansion of public housing, like the one in the Wilson and Callaghan governments in the 1970s. This would be expensive, especially if such housing was let [rented] at below-market rates. And few Britons aspire to rent from the [city] council [ie, 'housing projects' in American English] for life. Better would be to unleash the market. A change to regulations on green-belt land, which surrounds cities and which is designed to block construction, is long overdue. Far from being a bucolic retreat, much of the green belt is intensively farmed. By one estimate, more of Surrey is devoted to golf courses than houses. Within Greater London enough green-belt land languishes to build 1.6m houses at average densities")
My comment:
(a) green belt (United Kingdom) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_belt_(United_Kingdom)
(b) I read this article at that time, did not quite understand it and never introduce it to you. I thought the article meant to use the green belt -- as well as hinted highrises -- to build housing, and could not believe this would win political support. Imagine New York City gave out permits to construct houses in Central Park. But looking back, that is indeed what Economist meant.
(2) City politics | Sorry, We're Full; On the West Coast, the Democratic coalition is split over housing costs. Economist, Apr 20, 2019 https://www.economist.com/united ... r-housing-costs-in-
(part of paragraph 2: "San Francisco, where median monthly rent for a one-bedroom flat has reached $3,500 according to Zillow, a real-estate website, is only the most pathological example. West Coast cities, which are under near-total control of the leftiest Democrats around, rank among the least affordable")
Paragraph 7: "Housing prices are high because demand has grown more quickly than supply. Supporters of rent control [which is prevalent in West Coast] pay no heed to the opportunities they deny to poor and middle-class people to move to thriving cities [presumably urbanites are unwilling to move out thanks to rent control]. And yet market-urbanist coalition, which pushes for relaxed zoning rules and more buildings, had little sway over local politics. * * * Ideas that economists are fond of seldom inspire popular movements. But that has changed with the emergence of Yimby movement, a loosely organised bloc of those who say 'yes in my backyard' to new development [in contrast to more common NIMBY: not in my backyard].
My comment:
(a) Naturally homeowners do not want to have highrises around them, blocking sunshine and views.
(b) "market-urbanist coalition"
(i) market urbanism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_urbanism
("The term was coined by Adam Hengels, founder of the Market Urbanism blog")
(ii) About Market Urbanism. undated. https://marketurbanism.com/about/
("This site was founded in 2007, after Adam Hengels realized that free market advocates and urbanists actually share many objectives, despite being at odds in many spheres of the intellectual discussion. This conversation is intended introduce free-market thought to urbanists, and introduce urbanism to market advocates in order to bridge the gaps in the discussion. * * * Market Urbanism examines how market forces and respect for property rights * * * When left to market forces, as opposed to intervention")