I'm really glad to see this sort of "yes, and..." approach. I've seen too many people say that zoning reform will have little effect, but still oppose it in favor of some of the policies you propose. That said, I think your critiques of Econ 101 Supply and Demand are misguided.
"Econ 101 would have you believe that as more housing units are built—even if they are luxury units—overall prices would begin to come down"
This is only true if demand remains constant or decreases. If demand increases along with supply, due to "a big population inflow" for instance, prices may well increase.
"Atlanta’s poorest families have not benefited en masse from new housing units."
I disagree with this as well. Prices may not have come down, but they are almost certainly lower than they would have been if no new housing had been built.
That’s fair. My critique was trying to get at the fact that commentary often treats these things static—when supply goes up, nothing else changes, so prices will go down.
I don’t think any serious policy analyst expects that to be the case. Of course a few years of increased supply are insufficient to undo decades of underdevelopment.
As far as your solutions, several of them are directly addressed within abundance, notably the building of shelter capacity and social housing. As you point out, we lack these things in the ….abundant number we require them. The authors explore how government restrictions ON ITSELF often cause exactly these kinds of project to be exceedingly expensive and difficult.
I'm really glad to see this sort of "yes, and..." approach. I've seen too many people say that zoning reform will have little effect, but still oppose it in favor of some of the policies you propose. That said, I think your critiques of Econ 101 Supply and Demand are misguided.
"Econ 101 would have you believe that as more housing units are built—even if they are luxury units—overall prices would begin to come down"
This is only true if demand remains constant or decreases. If demand increases along with supply, due to "a big population inflow" for instance, prices may well increase.
"Atlanta’s poorest families have not benefited en masse from new housing units."
I disagree with this as well. Prices may not have come down, but they are almost certainly lower than they would have been if no new housing had been built.
That’s fair. My critique was trying to get at the fact that commentary often treats these things static—when supply goes up, nothing else changes, so prices will go down.
I don’t think any serious policy analyst expects that to be the case. Of course a few years of increased supply are insufficient to undo decades of underdevelopment.
As far as your solutions, several of them are directly addressed within abundance, notably the building of shelter capacity and social housing. As you point out, we lack these things in the ….abundant number we require them. The authors explore how government restrictions ON ITSELF often cause exactly these kinds of project to be exceedingly expensive and difficult.