This is not how one attributes principal causation among multiple potential causes.

> at t=0 you have at least 2, maybe 3 housing units required for the same number of people

Plenty of families immigrate. And at least in America, immigrant households seem to be denser than native-born ones. You’re assuming immigrant households are smaller than average, which would indeed be surprising unless they’re all quite wealthy.

▲

xienze 14 hours ago | parent | next [-]

But you agree it certainly must contribute to the problem?

	▲	JumpCrisscross 14 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> you agree it certainly must contribute to the problem? As a multi-decade effect? No, not really. Absent migration I don’t think home prices would be flat in Europe. In some cases, in the short term? Sure. But to answer to what extent is it a distraction versus actual driver of home unaffordability, you need numbers. The article provides compelling evidence for zoning. Given the animus against immigrants in Europe, I’d guess I’m assuming if these data existed they’d already have been found.

▲

xienze 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> And at least in America, immigrant households seem to be denser than native-born ones.

Answer true or false. One couple+one child requires less housing (in the short-to-medium term) than one couple+one immigrant.

	▲	JumpCrisscross 12 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> One couple+one child requires less housing (in the short-to-medium term) than one couple+one immigrant If two couples and two children take up one unit of housing while providing three units of labour, that’s more space efficient than the one couple + one child if even both parents work. This sort of napkin math doesn’t work for these problems. Particularly when we’re essentially debating elasticity with respect to demand versus supply.