Minneapolis' affordability isn't from state laws; it's from city-level reforms.
Ohio's zoning laws are mostly controlled at the city level. Columbus recently enacted upzoning for major corridors; see here: https://zone-in-columbus.hub.arcgis.com/
Had to read it on Columbus Dispatch. Very glad we have one major city doing something! Dayton and Montgomery County have been depleted of all housing and community services. Homeless population just had a huge increase. Food banks running out. The city is broken.
It's beyond comprehension that so called "great leaders" of "great states" think it's more important to build detention centers than to build affordable housing and work to bring costs down for people. The rich get richer........
This is exactly the right thing to do. Yes, there are also other things to do. But nothing works as well as simply massively increasing housing supply. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.
Another way to look at it, though, is that it lowers property values. House value is the prime retirement asset for so many. Where is the concern for retirees well-being?
That would be *a* way to look at it. The wrong way. House values in Mpls still rising even with new policies. Also, as retirement asset, have to consider broader population trends: will that unit in that neighborhood be what buyers 5-10-30 years down the road be looking for? Interest rates then?
But the effect of the policy of increasing housing stock is as I described. And I so rarely hear those advocating for more housing reflecting on or addressing the downside of those policies or actions.
Can someone tell the City of Toronto that hallway condos with a single windowless closet for a bedroom that sell for $800k+ don't actually count as "boosting housing supply"? pls & thnks
In Canada we did the exact opposite the Liberal govt in Ottawa has to go. On Highway One outside Hope BC as the weather goes to freezing several RV’s all old have joined the ppl already camped or squatting there at the trail to the waterfall (not bridal falls).
And yet, iff you earn $20/hour ($5 over minimum wage) there are currently 3 apartments in SW Minneapolis you can afford for 30% of your salary. Trickle down rent might have reduced rent, but not enough for many to afford.
I don't know that I can give a comprehensive answer to your question, but if I personally were sharing this image, I would have put something like "One chart showing that Minneapolis has sharply increased its approval of new dwellings per 1000 people since 2017,
outpacing Omaha, Columbus, Kansas City, Cincinnati, and Indianapolis. A second chart shows a sharp decrease in real-terms median rent over that same period, while real-terms median rents in those other cities have all gone up. Source: FT."
I think the issue is that automated screen readers can’t parse images well. They need alt text to properly describe an image. So someone with vision impairment might be told the general content (second line goes down when first line goes up) but they’re not getting the details of the charts.
I am not aware of any mainstream screen reader software that attempts to describe an image; the alt text is needed because otherwise users get nothing.
In this case, the main problem here for a visually impaired person and the rest of us is that Tina doesn't share the link to the article where the image is found. That's a habit from X and Meta penalizing a post for having a link. And the image is behind a paywall: https://www.ft.com/content/86836af4-6b52-49e8-a8f0-8aec6181dbc5
Can confirm, my brother was lost in the great Minneapolis murdering of 2020, his ghost has a really neat apartment I love visiting and trying all the burned out restaurants and nightlife.
Is the new housing inexpensive? That seems like an important factor to mention. Because of course there are many who would like to say that building luxury housing drives down the price of affordable housing. And we shouldn't make it easier for them to say that if it is not true.
If you reduce supply without reducing demand (rent controls) or increase demand without increasing supply (subsidies), then you have rationing through price or by some left homeless.
Increasing supply, not demand, is the best policy.
Also, does it seem weird to put Minneapolis on a graph with Cincinnati, Columbus, Indianapolis, KC & Omaha while leaving out Ann Arbor, Chicago, Duluth, Lansing, Madison, Milwaukee, Quad Cities, St. Louis & St. Paul?
Wonderful that it is working to bring down rents. Have you also seen that it is reducing the numbers of unhoused? Thank you for your work - Best wishes for Happy Holidays.
Affordable Housing & insurance
Livable Wage
Medicare for All w/Dental,Eyes,Ears
Child care
public education
End Homeless
immigration reform
Fight Crime
Balanced budget
mortgage rates,inflation, unemployment;all <3%
increase water reuse&desalination
End nuisance fees
Minnesota is one of the handful of states that I’d want to live in, now, given both climate change and the incoming horrors at the federal level. We’re shielded here, to the extent possible - both in state government, and by the generally good people
I was only 3 when it happened, but don't think I don't know about that 1984 election. Y'all were the lone bastion of people who saw Reagan and went "nah"
The housing market is purposely suppressed to keep us renting. If there isn't any law against it, it is never going to stop. Cities should only allow permits for housing that will help the market, not huge ugly depressing apartment buildings that cost 50% of yr monthly income.
When demand increases while supply remain constant, prices rise, right? (Been a while since Econ 101). If demand remains constant while supply increases, then prices go down, iirc. So if supply increases and prices go down, doesn't that mean demand went down?
That is likely what happened. There is now more people in the city than before. There are more vacancies so prices are slightly down but people did not move out
I think this image is from the Financial Times article
"Repeat after me: building any new homes reduces housing costs for all" Sept 14, 2023. The cost is pretty steep for access ($39 a month). Maybe a subscriber can provide a gift article. https://www.ft.com/content/86836af4-6b52-49e8-a8f0-8aec6181dbc5
I need to ask my daughter to send me articles that she gets through her college library account. Or figure out how to use my library card to open a link
We have an entire party that is going to be in control of the country on a federal level that has formed its core beliefs around an economic theory with 40 years of research behind discrediting it. Economics 101 has failed us.
Agree with other comment - S+D absolutely applies to housing. When there is a high demand (millennials, Gen z entering housing market) and low supply (prop devs and owners not selling) it absolutely increases prices + property values. More supply = satisfying demand, which overall lowers prices.
I’m glad people are willing to explain high school economics to me and I’m sorry that I believe the most complex economic issue in North America can’t be reduced to a trite phrase. That perhaps there might be more to the issue.
If you mean the demand is inelastic because people cannot choose to not live somewhere, that's true. It's still supply and demand though. Vacancy rate is inversely tied to housing costs literally everywhere on earth with a free market system.
I don’t know, ask a developer or a property holding company or anyone who benefits from the high value of property. This change in Minneapolis required government intervention, not just a capitalist market recognizing a need for supply.
serious answer: because the law of supply and demand applies to free markets, which does not describe the US housing-construction market in any meaningful way. when the markets get freed up a little, as in the Minneapolis case, you start seeing the effects.
While the intention is laudable, simplistic solutions won't solve the issue. Minneapolis's affordable housing crisis is deeply rooted in systemic inequality and gentrification.
Favorably, but it's also not the most useful comparison because Chicago is such a huge metro statistical area. Regardless, we lag behind many American cities in building new housing.
Florida new:
If you don’t have family in Florida, it is a lot easier for the guardianship programs to take your property and sell it quickly while you are in a nursing home.
They have loads of new licenses plates to categorize what type of Florida resident you are if you decide to become one.
Recognizing I’m ignorant here, are there other contributing factors to the drop in rents during this time? Especially since the time frame includes the covid surge?
Wild how effective a 'build more houses' policy is at addressing the housing shortage. And yet still the party will have to be dragged into supporting it. Perhaps we can trade Trans Rights as a bargaining chip. Maybe then Scarborough will be willing to endorse the idea.
Taking away the already abandoned/short term leased houses from private and corporate owners would also do that if they were then given to those in need and it wouldn’t lead to more suburban sprawl that will continue to kill our climate. More of the same isn’t a fix.
Comments
And here I thought my economics professor was pulling my leg.
You can set up a reminder:
Go to your profile settings, click "Accessibility" under Basics, make sure "Require alt text before posting" is toggled on.
Many won't RS w/out alt text.
Ohio's zoning laws are mostly controlled at the city level. Columbus recently enacted upzoning for major corridors; see here: https://zone-in-columbus.hub.arcgis.com/
(con't)
If you reduce supply without reducing demand (rent controls) or increase demand without increasing supply (subsidies), then you have rationing through price or by some left homeless.
Increasing supply, not demand, is the best policy.
Here is some Chicago data. Rents are rising very quickly.
https://www.illinoispolicy.org/press-releases/chicagos-average-rent-now-costs-2200-up-over-600-a-month-in-just-under-10-years/
Affordable Housing & insurance
Livable Wage
Medicare for All w/Dental,Eyes,Ears
Child care
public education
End Homeless
immigration reform
Fight Crime
Balanced budget
mortgage rates,inflation, unemployment;all <3%
increase water reuse&desalination
Land Back
I see you
In 1972 the lone state to buck the others was Massachusetts.
We were the only state to majority vote for George McGovern over Richard Nixon. It was quite a change for me, having been born and raised in Alabama.
Please vote against any Trump appointment where the individual has not been properly vetted and found to be a good match to the agency.
https://tcf.org/content/report/rallying-the-voices-of-the-excluded-for-zoning-reform-the-case-of-minneapolis/
Demand is probably higher too than it would have been without increased supply.
If supply increases and prices go down it could mean that that demand went down or same. It could also mean demand went slightly up.
If there are more places for people to live, won't rents go down?
WON'T SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE LANDLORDS?
"Repeat after me: building any new homes reduces housing costs for all" Sept 14, 2023. The cost is pretty steep for access ($39 a month). Maybe a subscriber can provide a gift article.
https://www.ft.com/content/86836af4-6b52-49e8-a8f0-8aec6181dbc5
https://x.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1703752563080720419/
from
@jburnmurdoch.bsky.social
Do better, and think through your efficacy of messaging your efforts.
Thank you!!
https://bsky.app/profile/torrleonard.bsky.social/post/3lciqvl6dzc2p
If you don’t have family in Florida, it is a lot easier for the guardianship programs to take your property and sell it quickly while you are in a nursing home.
They have loads of new licenses plates to categorize what type of Florida resident you are if you decide to become one.
Increasing supply LOWERS prices?