2/4/19
Today the Sacramento Bee published an article about the increase in prices for California land. This would further worsening the current housing shortage by making land, and the housing on it, even more unaffordable than it already is.
Even my environmentalist friends are eager to cast aside environmental restrictions and land-use planning to increase the housing stock. Then, and only then, would the "magic of the market" be able to house all those who want to live in California.
I've written previously about how the public policy surrounding development is skewed to enrich a small oligarchy. For example, planning as currently practiced is designed-to-fail, and working as designed. It could be helpful, but its fundamental design prevents that.
Almost completely omitted from any discussion of development dysfunction is the problem of money. For example, current public policy actually encourages land speculation--which, by definition, needlessly and unproductively raises prices to line the pockets of the oligarchs.
How to fix that? We could repeal Proposition 13, and start taxing land again. This makes speculation far less profitable, and motivates landowners to make productive use of vacant land rather than holding it off the market until prices rise.
We could also do what Texas does: outlaw refinancing that pulls cash out of the property refinanced. Texas has some zero-planning cities (Houston), and some with very enlightened plans (McKinney), so planning is not why their housing is so cheap, and house prices did not follow the boom-and-bust pattern before and during the Great Recession (2007-8).
Texas does have abundant land, so its conventional (non-prop 13) property taxes are not the entire story. Still, the misdirection surrounding the financialization of real estate suggests policy makers ignore many remedies that would be effective in resolving this problem.
Today the Sacramento Bee published an article about the increase in prices for California land. This would further worsening the current housing shortage by making land, and the housing on it, even more unaffordable than it already is.
Even my environmentalist friends are eager to cast aside environmental restrictions and land-use planning to increase the housing stock. Then, and only then, would the "magic of the market" be able to house all those who want to live in California.
I've written previously about how the public policy surrounding development is skewed to enrich a small oligarchy. For example, planning as currently practiced is designed-to-fail, and working as designed. It could be helpful, but its fundamental design prevents that.
Almost completely omitted from any discussion of development dysfunction is the problem of money. For example, current public policy actually encourages land speculation--which, by definition, needlessly and unproductively raises prices to line the pockets of the oligarchs.
How to fix that? We could repeal Proposition 13, and start taxing land again. This makes speculation far less profitable, and motivates landowners to make productive use of vacant land rather than holding it off the market until prices rise.
We could also do what Texas does: outlaw refinancing that pulls cash out of the property refinanced. Texas has some zero-planning cities (Houston), and some with very enlightened plans (McKinney), so planning is not why their housing is so cheap, and house prices did not follow the boom-and-bust pattern before and during the Great Recession (2007-8).
Texas does have abundant land, so its conventional (non-prop 13) property taxes are not the entire story. Still, the misdirection surrounding the financialization of real estate suggests policy makers ignore many remedies that would be effective in resolving this problem.
No comments:
Post a Comment
One of the objects if this blog is to elevate civil discourse. Please do your part by presenting arguments rather than attacks or unfounded accusations.