U.S. needs housing, not public housing
Progressives have a big new old idea to address soaring rents, and it can be summarized in three words: more public housing. I agree with two-thirds of this agenda — America certainly needs more housing. I have a problem with the “public” part.
To the extent this talk helps get the left to see that the affordability of housing is in large part a function of the supply of housing, it’s all to the good. What the discussion is overlooking, however, are the astronomical costs of public-sector construction in the U.S. One recent study found a 50% increase in road-building costs over a span of just two years.
If the government doesn’t build highways and bus shelters and train lines, nobody else is going to. A great nation needs great infrastructure, which requires both public funding and costeffective construction methods.
But housing? In a country where every level of government is strapped for cash and where budgets for even the most plausible and necessary projects seem to be exploding, how does it make sense for the government to build things the private sector is willing to?
The United States, whatever its problems, does not lack for developers, contractors and entrepreneurs who are willing to finance home construction when they are allowed to do so. What stands in their way is a dizzying array of rules and regulations — designed, for the most part, to prevent new construction.
One criticism of the YIMBY vs. NIMBY debate is that it fails to emphasize public housing. As someone who has been arguing for more sensible zoning regulations for more than a decade, I’m not going to pretend the debate doesn’t get tiresome. But it would be wrong to say it isn’t vital. How best to enable citizens to provide shelter for themselves is a core issue for any society.
It would make sense for the government to build public housing if it could prove it was good at building efficiently. But that’s a hard case to make. Until the U.S. can figure out a way to build the things it needs the government to build, and at a reasonable price, why not simply allow the private sector to build more housing?