| ▲ | mjevans 3 hours ago | |||||||||||||
Were the market functioning, there would be sufficient additional housing near jobs that investors could not sit on and rent-seek reselling property near those jobs as a source of profit. The market is not free. It is heavily regulated by what can be built where when. There is a distinct lack of planning and regulation to protect consumers in this market. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | JuniperMesos 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||
It's true that there are heavy regulations on what housing can be built where, but I don't think this is primarily driven by "investors" (in the sense of people who make their money by being commercial or residential landlords). I think it's primarily driven by homeowner-occupiers - people who own the homes that they themselves live in, who are not professional investors trying to maximize their rental profit, and who care a lot about the ways in which new construction or the ability of more people to live near them might negatively effect their quality of life in the place they live. | ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | thrance 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||
The free market consolidated into this on its own. Some actors became too powerful for it to remain "free". | ||||||||||||||