7 ms·

Is it just me or is this article taking a negative spin on what's happening? The change in the market is described as a "cool down". Recent construction is desc

Is it just me or is this article taking a negative spin on what's happening? The change in the market is described as a "cool down". Recent construction is described as "overbuilding". Higher vacancy rates are described as a "glut of luxury apartment buildings". As a renter, when I read this article I just see lower house prices and lower rents and this is awesome.

alphabettsy 3y ago
I agree. We need more supply to push prices down. It’s too bad for the people who bought at the peak, but it makes housing more accessible which is a good thing.
- fuzzfactor 3y ago
  There was some discussion on another article about premanufactured homes of the past whose sub-structures were mass-produced then were delivered & assembled on-site. This never has gotten far beyond the niche stage, but what is really needed is still domestic factories working around-the-clock taking the timber, steel, and other raw materials and fabricating them using mass-production into ready-to-assemble building components, anyway. Not much differently than they have been doing traditionally, but increased output on steroids. And concentrating on mobile home parts and accessories. There can probably be nothing more leveling for a market than a quick infusion of nice, clean, new, low-cost, and most importantly rapidly depreciating dwelling units. In abundant quantities. Convoys coming in from all directions until normalcy is restored and stock can accurately be taken. There needs to be some balancing force that can tip the scales to make it possible for a SFH buyer to get their money's worth like it hasn't been possible for a very long time. Naturally the amount of homeless has always been a function of whether there is "any" housing which is affordable for the least wealthy citizens, while the real estate people do best when there isn't even anything affordable for people who are far from the least wealthy. The widening gap is easier to fall into, and if you do, you're inches closer to the recently homeless who are moving back up, trying to get back to where you were. "All that's needed" is a decent cohort of citizens to commit to trailer park life for a period of time, and pave the way whatever it takes (politically, legally) to make sure the settled cost of the dwelling is eventually proportional to the underlying value of land, materials & labor that were involved. Which is a small fraction of what they will be paying for a SFH sooner than otherwise, since they won't be drained as badly while living in a trailer compared to a high-rent home or complex. And the next residents in the trailer can have the benefit of a lower-cost dwelling when they might need it most. Trailers can get run down pretty fast but it can be a good option to have, especially if things don't turn around for everybody. By then of course, Linux would have long taken over the desktop ;)

alphabettsy 3y ago

I agree. We need more supply to push prices down. It’s too bad for the people who bought at the peak, but it makes housing more accessible which is a good thing.

fuzzfactor 3y ago
There was some discussion on another article about premanufactured homes of the past whose sub-structures were mass-produced then were delivered & assembled on-site. This never has gotten far beyond the niche stage, but what is really needed is still domestic factories working around-the-clock taking the timber, steel, and other raw materials and fabricating them using mass-production into ready-to-assemble building components, anyway. Not much differently than they have been doing traditionally, but increased output on steroids. And concentrating on mobile home parts and accessories. There can probably be nothing more leveling for a market than a quick infusion of nice, clean, new, low-cost, and most importantly rapidly depreciating dwelling units. In abundant quantities. Convoys coming in from all directions until normalcy is restored and stock can accurately be taken. There needs to be some balancing force that can tip the scales to make it possible for a SFH buyer to get their money's worth like it hasn't been possible for a very long time. Naturally the amount of homeless has always been a function of whether there is "any" housing which is affordable for the least wealthy citizens, while the real estate people do best when there isn't even anything affordable for people who are far from the least wealthy. The widening gap is easier to fall into, and if you do, you're inches closer to the recently homeless who are moving back up, trying to get back to where you were. "All that's needed" is a decent cohort of citizens to commit to trailer park life for a period of time, and pave the way whatever it takes (politically, legally) to make sure the settled cost of the dwelling is eventually proportional to the underlying value of land, materials & labor that were involved. Which is a small fraction of what they will be paying for a SFH sooner than otherwise, since they won't be drained as badly while living in a trailer compared to a high-rent home or complex. And the next residents in the trailer can have the benefit of a lower-cost dwelling when they might need it most. Trailers can get run down pretty fast but it can be a good option to have, especially if things don't turn around for everybody. By then of course, Linux would have long taken over the desktop ;)