cab21 Posted September 26, 2015 Posted September 26, 2015 how would a anarcho capitalist go about providing affordable housing real estate? There are many government programs set up to help both buyers and sellers of affordable housing real estate, do you think the same could be achieved if only using private methods of real estate development, and private methods of helping people get into affordable income homes.
MrCapitalism Posted September 26, 2015 Posted September 26, 2015 Seriously? The government helps makes housing affordable? ....seriously?? 1
Alan C. Posted September 26, 2015 Posted September 26, 2015 More people on the planet have access to a mobile phone than they do to a toilet. If you can figure out why then you'll have your answer. 1
cab21 Posted September 26, 2015 Author Posted September 26, 2015 More people on the planet have access to a mobile phone than they do to a toilet. If you can figure out why then you'll have your answer. i'm not sure if these are correct as to why, but i'll take some guesses cell phone access takes less real estate area to provide than toilet access. cell phone access can apply to anyone in a given area 100% of the time, while toilet access can require people get in lines while others are using the toilet, as less people can use the same toilet at the same time as people that can use the same cell phone network at the same time. the material costs of providing toilet access are greater than the material costs of providing cell phone access.
Mister Mister Posted September 27, 2015 Posted September 27, 2015 I don't mean to be condescending, but can I ask what is your familiarity with basic economic principles like opportunity cost, supply and demand, division of labor, and so on?
cab21 Posted September 27, 2015 Author Posted September 27, 2015 I don't mean to be condescending, but can I ask what is your familiarity with basic economic principles like opportunity cost, supply and demand, division of labor, and so on? opportunity cost is the loss of the potential gain of a alturnative choice. supply and demand is a relationship between supply, demand and price. higher demand than supply drives prices up, lower demand than supply drives prices down. division of labor is when individuals take on specialized roles to cooperate in a business venture.
powder Posted September 27, 2015 Posted September 27, 2015 how would a anarcho capitalist go about providing affordable housing real estate? There are many government programs set up to help both buyers and sellers of affordable housing real estate, do you think the same could be achieved if only using private methods of real estate development, and private methods of helping people get into affordable income homes. hmmm, forum member for over 3 years, almost 900 posts,... writes "providing affordable housing" and "many government programs to help both buyers and sellers",... hmmm.
Will Torbald Posted September 27, 2015 Posted September 27, 2015 how would a anarcho capitalist go about providing affordable housing real estate? Imagine if the ancap solution were equally effective to the statist one. Would you choose it? Now, imagine if the solution were worse than the statist one, and housing was actually more expensive in the thought experiment. Would you choose statism over a free society for it?
Crallask Posted September 27, 2015 Posted September 27, 2015 Yet another problem technology is already solving DESPITE governmental barriers. http://www.sciencealert.com/this-chinese-company-can-3d-print-10-houses-in-a-day How will it be solved? Idk man, by the time we get there we'll likely be on a terraformed Mars at this rate!
cab21 Posted September 27, 2015 Author Posted September 27, 2015 Imagine if the ancap solution were equally effective to the statist one. Would you choose it? Now, imagine if the solution were worse than the statist one, and housing was actually more expensive in the thought experiment. Would you choose statism over a free society for it? the ancap solution is the one i am choosing. if it's as simple as saying market rate housing only, then market rate housing only is the solution.
jughead Posted September 27, 2015 Posted September 27, 2015 The same way that the market provides affordable food and clothing. The technical aspects of their solution aren't important and aren't for us to speculate on. The role of freedom and the desire of men to maximize their outcomes are sufficient.
Mister Mister Posted September 28, 2015 Posted September 28, 2015 I don't even see why this is a question. What would you accept as an adequate answer? How can we possibly know? If we don't satisfy your need/opinion for people to have cheap or free housing, then will you reject the NAP and respect for property? It just feels like another distraction in the endless series of obstacles people put in front of human freedom.
cab21 Posted September 28, 2015 Author Posted September 28, 2015 I don't even see why this is a question. What would you accept as an adequate answer? How can we possibly know? If we don't satisfy your need/opinion for people to have cheap or free housing, then will you reject the NAP and respect for property? It just feels like another distraction in the endless series of obstacles people put in front of human freedom. Developers are required by law to make a certain percent of housing fit criteria, so even if they want only apply the NAP and respect property rights, the law does not let that happen. So in a way the justification for taking such government projects on is that developers are forced to, even when they disagree with the government policy. A developer can say all houses should be market rate, but is not allowed to participate in a market where all houses are market rate. so i guess its just the fundamental principles that matter, such as advocating the NAP and individual rights, that would be the acceptable answer. i guess my concern had more do with that its mandatory by government that develupers do affordable housing in order to be allowed to do market rate housing.
GregMerwe Posted September 29, 2015 Posted September 29, 2015 Affordable housing is a mistake. In terms of technological progress only the best quality and largest houses should be built. No one wants to live in a shipping container over a normal sized house. The problem the with the concept of affordable housing is that it can have negative effects on already low supply housing markets. In reality a lot of people in their 20s and 30s are living in house shares. When new houses come on to the market that are low quality and small and are given to specific people at a lower price. Those people who do no receive that house are negatively affected. The available housing stock is reduced because those houses could have gone on to the market. Houses are sold at the bottom end of the market that does not have any positive effect on reducing the price of housing outside of those programs. While if only high quality and large housing was built. People that can afford those houses will move up from already existing housing and those houses will be sold to other people moving up. When this happens enough you get social mobility in housing. The poor people then will be able to afford higher quality housing because the new low quality will be higher than affordable housing would be. Affordable housing programs help to reduce the quality of housing stock and push up prices in the non social housing sector due to reducing the supply. That was economic explanation and socially building lots of high density low quality housing has its own negative effects. Read/listen to some Thomas Sowell on that subject. Also watch Milton Friedman documentary free to choose, the episode cradle to grave about welfare and social housing.
Recommended Posts