I repeated the same argument here many times. But the reality is that density creates a vicious cycle of price increases. Higher density provides easier access to talent for companies, so they concentrate in urban cores. This in turn results in the only desirable jobs (and housing) being within the commute distance from the cores. So more people move in, resulting in even greater advantage for companies. Rinse, wash, repeat.

Think about this: EVERY large European city now has a "housing crisis". And nice cities just a couple of hours from them have housing that is essentially free. In Japan it's often _literally_ free.

Want an example of a city that doesn't have a housing crisis and is comparable in population to Paris or Berlin? Houston, TX.

▲

gamblor956 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Houston, TX has a housing crisis. https://abc13.com/post/more-half-houston-renters-struggle-ho...

They aren't building enough rental housing so rents are going through the roof.

	▲	2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]

▲

BugsJustFindMe 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You're still just saying "If you make a place nicer to live, then more people will want to live there."

Density is not the thing making the prices go up. Local supply lagging behind local demand is what does that. Your two choices are either build more or make living there less desirable compared to somewhere else. There's no third choice.

> nice cities just a couple of hours from them have housing that is essentially free

If nobody wants to live there then tautologically people have decided that they aren't nice.

	▲	cyberax an hour ago \| parent [-]
		> If you make a place nicer to live Dense cities are not nice places to live, especially for less well-off people. Just look at the number of children per capita. You are just _forced_ to live there by economic forces, whether you like it or not. Japan is really illustrative there. You HAVE to live in Tokyo or other large cities if you want to achieve anything. Yet a young person will not be able to afford anything decent. And forget about families. Oh, and the construction capacity in and around Tokyo is maxxed out. Parts of the city are literally permanent giant construction zones. They're building housing as fast as possible. Yet the prices are _skyrocketing_. > Your two choices are either build more or make living there less desirable compared to somewhere else. You don't have that choice. The construction rate in large cities can't keep with demand if the city is growing. You can try to streamline permitting (like in Japan), prohibit foreign ownership and/or investment (Vancouver), regulate the rents (NYC), dance around naked under the full Moon - and nothing will work. > There's no third choice. False. There is one: make other places nicer by promoting remote work and incentivizing companies to open new offices in smaller cities. Houston is a great example. It's pretty much the only large city in the US that doesn't have a housing crisis. And it did that (on accident) by not having a real consolidated urban core. Instead, it's a collection of smaller cities, each one with its own business core.