Where I live in France there was a big relaxation in building permits in the 50s to 70s, and we are dealing with these projects badly designed (because of the lack of oversight) today. Neighborhoods that are urban hell, disfigured city centers with giant hotels 5 times higher than other buildings, etc.

With better planning the same capacity could have been added but with way better quality of life.

▲

kubb 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

What you need is to require new construction to have a certain density along with building standards (sunlight, insulation, etc.).

Just deregulating exposes the land to the whim of the developer’s good will — trusting them not to get the most bang for the buck out of building a slum, which is a fickle guarantee.

If there’s no short term profitability, public sector needs to step in. Housing is infrastructure, it’s crucial to the land’s growth.

▲

nikanj 2 hours ago | parent [-]

If every developer was able to build as much housing as they ever wanted, the quality would go up through competition.

In pretty much every other sector of the economy, the government regulates safety, and quality comes via competition. Housing should be no different.

But because we've artificially throttled the amount of housing that can be built, the best way to improve profits is to push down the quality as the buyers don't really have an alternative

	▲	Cthulhu_ 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I'm not an economist but my armchair opinion thinks you're wrong about quality going up; competition is about driving pricing down and undercutting others, cutting corners as much as possible. Take Amazon or the Chinese webshops, they've flooded the market with products that do the same thing but cheaper, but whose quality is way lower. Take the acquisitions of e.g. power tool brands by investors, who then use the brand's brand awareness and quality inertia to cut costs and boost their profit margin. Take hotels, which used to feel luxurious but which have over time been redesigned to require minimal maintenance and personnel. The only competitive market where they try to one-up each other on quality is aimed at the rich where money is not an issue. The middle ground is disappearing.
	▲	kubb 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Competition would have that effect… in a perfect market, which is a theoretical construct. Especially in context of urbanism, building an abomination can hurt the entire community and takes space from proper construction. Here my thoughts about ideal markets https://news.ycombinator.com/context?id=46085880

▲

iknowstuff 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> same capacity could have been added

That’s not at all likely.