doesn't this fit right in with FDR's second bill of rights -- everyone
deserves a good job, a good house, a good retirement, etc......
the essence of communism. -- j
.

"The stubborn unwillingness of incumbent homeowners"
A stubborn unwillingness to sell something at less than the going rate is normal and healthy.

I agree with Poplicola's comment but it's not the whole story.

The real problem creating housing shortages is the scam known as urban planning -- in which local governments (controlled by the existing homeowners) keep most of the unbuilt land off the market by force of law in order to drive home prices up as high as possible and keep them there. So long as this cartel arrangement operates, there will be an artificial shortage of homes.

Most countries have the same problem -- but at least in poor countries there are areas outside most cities where illegal building is tolerated, greatly reducing the number of homeless people. But no jurisdiction in the US will do that; they apparently believe that it's better to be homeless than to live in "unsafe" housing. Yet another area in which the Left dismisses others' suffering with "Let them eat cake."

The expanded view of the map is almost useless, but the normalized version is interesting. I would like to have looked at that map more closely, but it kept gif-pulsing at me like a time lapse of a hemorrhoid.

Jan

Regarding your thoughts about rent control, I've had to consider this recently as a city where I have rentals is considering some form of rent control. I realized that there is a counterintuitive result of rent control. Nearly all landlords I know are complacent about their rents once someone has moved in. If you've got a good renter, it is easy to justify not raising the rent because of the cost and risk of finding a replacement who might not be as good. In a rent control environment there is a yearly adjustment or limit on how much you can raise a rent. This amount actually makes it easier to justify raising rents yearly because 1) the government says it is OK and 2) if you don't raise the rent, the government might not allow you to do so in the future. So, depending on the type of rent control (vacancy decontrol, eviction limitations, etc) overall the affect on an individual landlord is going to be a mixed bag.

If you want to know the REAL, FULL reason why housing prices are completely off the rails, just read "The Housing Boom and Bust," by Thomas Sowell. The author is out to lunch by inferring that it's the homeowners who are responsible for the high prices and limited supply. As usual, it's the government that's the culprit. Land use restrictions, rent control, height limitations and other meddling serve to blow the value of land off the map in areas where the GOVERNMENT is allowed to interfere with the market.

I wish the City had not condemned the apartment
building I lived in last year. It was alleged to be un-
safe. I disagreed. But anyway, I had not gone to
the City and complained. And if I choose to live in
an old run-down shack, it's nobody"s G--d----d
business but mine and the landlord's. Now I
live in a place the costs nearly twice as much.
Apparently, the City turned it over to some
scavenger who likes to "gentrify" buildings, and
I heard something about a message from her,
but I really don't want to deal with her. If she
uses the government to take other people's
property away, then it seems to me that renting
from her would be like receiving stolen goods.
(Aside from the fact that I probably couldn't
afford it anyway).

---Oh well. Mark Twain once said, (I am quoting
from memory), "There is not a foot of land on
earth that is in possession of its rightful owner."

Housing shortages are not accidental. The government, as it implements UN Agenda 21, will continue to cause the price of property to soar. Ase Agenda 21 impacts the local planning in cities across the US, more land will be out of circulation, and the remaining inner city land will be beyond the means of the ordinary working person. Meanwhile, Hillary will likely continue her quest to place the homeless in the spare bedrooms of those who can afford to have that much space.

"The article seems to predicated on the belief that everyone has a right to live anywhere they want whether they can afford it or not."
Sounds very similar to the law which set up the housing crash a few years back, which forced lenders to forgo good financial practices when processing a home loan in the favor of minority status.
That didn't turn out well for anybody. Government at its finest, at the expense of the rest of us. As always.

I had a condo in San Diego. After only 6 years I was able to sell it for twice what I paid along with a few minor fix-ups that were needed. It was a beautiful place. The complex had 81 units in the style of a Spanish Villa. Five fountains, a pool and Jacuzzi, a sauna and two racquetball courts and two tennis courts.The only problem was that I was newly retired at the time and the cost of living plus the taxes made it a losing proposition to live there. We moved to Florida where there was family and most importantly, grandchildren. Just as a comparison, at the time we moved (1995) the price of a house like mine (4bdrm 2 bath) would cost 4 times more in S.D. than I paid on the west coast of Florida and 2 times more on the east coast. Plus, no state, county, or city income taxes. That means a part-time retirement job was viable. What a difference a few miles makes. Of course, the fact that we sold as the bubble was getting started and bought before it was speeding up made it almost a perfect time to sell or buy or as we did -- both.

Map would look much more impressive in 3D.

I haven't a clue what the article is talking about. So many statistics that prove nothing to solve a problem that isn't clarified. I might as well say green worms caused ...well what? What is the problem here? High housing prices? Why is that a problem? People are conspiring to keep land off the market? The author doen't prove that it's just ass-U-Me-d. What does employment have to do with this? I came away from the article with nothing but a logic headache. Feh!