America’s Frozen Housing Market Is Warping the Economy

T. A. Gardner said:
www.nahb.org

NAHB Tells Congress How Excessive Regulations and Codes Harm Housing Affordability

NAHB today told Congress that burdensome government regulations and mandates which support environmental, social and governance (ESG) policies impede the housing industry’s ability to increase the production of quality, affordable housing.
www.nahb.org

Builders and developers are telling Congress that federal DIE and ESG regulations are killing their industry.

Testifying on this topic at a House Financial Services subcommittee hearing, NAHB Chairman Alicia Huey, a custom home builder and developer from Birmingham, Ala., said a growing number of ESG policies at the local, state and federal level are having a direct impact on housing production and affordability.

“ESG policies already have caused home insurance companies to drop out of some areas and raise rates in others..."
www.constructiondive.com

Home building costs soar due to government regulations, material price increases

Regulations and codes add $93,870 to the cost of a new home, according to the National Association of Home Builders.
www.constructiondive.com www.constructiondive.com
  • Regulations imposed by all levels of government account for $93,870, or about 24% of the current average sales price ($397,300) of a new single-family home, according to a new study by the National Association of Home Builders. This amount marks a 10.9% increase over the past five years.
www.adn.com

Government regulations make home building hard in Alaska

With the recent fiscal crisis and battles of the budget, investing in development has been put on the back burner. However, home building is exactly what Alaska needs to help build the economy.
www.adn.com www.adn.com


Even the Biden administration's attempt to rule that many current 'gig workers' are now employees is killing the construction industry


Rules and regulations cost money. More rules and regulations strangle industry.
Click to expand...
11% increase over 5 years is winning.

Grocery store prices are up something like 100%.
 
Bigdog said:
The CO2 hoax indoctrination became endemic about 3 decades ago. Many young people bought into it. Now many WANT to rent to reduce their carbon footprint.

Builders are just trying to meet the consumer Demands that the socialist gov't engineered.
Click to expand...

rant-black.gif
 
Nordberg said:
The housing market is being warped by huge investment companies buying up homes and apartments. The Biden people are trying to break them up because they are pushing the process to "all the traffic will bear." There have been meetings of investors explaining how to get prices and profits as high as possible. https://ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/ne...ffordable-representative-adam-smith-congress-
Click to expand...
Cracka pleez,

The Biden Democrat lockdowns were designed to bankrupt small businesses and small landlords .... so that leftist crony mega corps could snatch up those properties at distressed prices.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
11% increase over 5 years is winning.

Grocery store prices are up something like 100%.
Click to expand...
The 11% is just the increase in regulation costs, Hawk.

From NAHB: Material cost increases since 2020 are shown in red ... (blue is 2016-20}

material-prices-four-year-percent-change.jpg


www.nahb.org

Material Costs

The rising cost of building materials is harming housing affordability as the trade war on softwood lumber, steel, aluminum and other imported materials and equipment exacerbates price volatility and needlessly drives up housing costs.
www.nahb.org

And ...
"The Associated Builders and Contractors reports that building material costs have increased by 37.7% since 2020. Since 2022, lumber has come down in price by 12.3%, while concrete products have increased by 14.8%. Builders still face significant labor shortages, too.

Overcoming construction inflation: How to beat rising construction costs​

1719742948211.png
Buildertrend
https://buildertrend.com › blog › tips-for-inflation-constr...
 
Bigdog said:
The 11% is just the increase in regulation costs, Hawk.

From NAHB: Material cost increases since 2020 are shown in red ... (blue is 2016-20}

material-prices-four-year-percent-change.jpg


www.nahb.org

Material Costs

The rising cost of building materials is harming housing affordability as the trade war on softwood lumber, steel, aluminum and other imported materials and equipment exacerbates price volatility and needlessly drives up housing costs.
www.nahb.org

And ...
"The Associated Builders and Contractors reports that building material costs have increased by 37.7% since 2020. Since 2022, lumber has come down in price by 12.3%, while concrete products have increased by 14.8%. Builders still face significant labor shortages, too.

Overcoming construction inflation: How to beat rising construction costs​

View attachment 27442
Buildertrend
https://buildertrend.com › blog › tips-for-inflation-constr...
Click to expand...
Wire is insane in price. Go to a Home Depot some time. They lock copper wire up now. A 100 foot roll of #12 that used to cost like $15 is close to $50 today. One of the things driving the price up so much is all the Greentard push to use solar, wind, EV's and electrify everything like appliances.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
www.nahb.org

NAHB Tells Congress How Excessive Regulations and Codes Harm Housing Affordability

NAHB today told Congress that burdensome government regulations and mandates which support environmental, social and governance (ESG) policies impede the housing industry’s ability to increase the production of quality, affordable housing.
www.nahb.org

Builders and developers are telling Congress that federal DIE and ESG regulations are killing their industry.

Testifying on this topic at a House Financial Services subcommittee hearing, NAHB Chairman Alicia Huey, a custom home builder and developer from Birmingham, Ala., said a growing number of ESG policies at the local, state and federal level are having a direct impact on housing production and affordability.

“ESG policies already have caused home insurance companies to drop out of some areas and raise rates in others..."
www.constructiondive.com

Home building costs soar due to government regulations, material price increases

Regulations and codes add $93,870 to the cost of a new home, according to the National Association of Home Builders.
www.constructiondive.com www.constructiondive.com
  • Regulations imposed by all levels of government account for $93,870, or about 24% of the current average sales price ($397,300) of a new single-family home, according to a new study by the National Association of Home Builders. This amount marks a 10.9% increase over the past five years.
www.adn.com

Government regulations make home building hard in Alaska

With the recent fiscal crisis and battles of the budget, investing in development has been put on the back burner. However, home building is exactly what Alaska needs to help build the economy.
www.adn.com www.adn.com


Even the Biden administration's attempt to rule that many current 'gig workers' are now employees is killing the construction industry


Rules and regulations cost money. More rules and regulations strangle industry.
Click to expand...
I've never suggested the federal government doesn't play a role in the increasing costs of housing, it does. What I've said is the largest issues are at the state and local level and focusing on the President (as the solution) misses much of what is going on.
 
cawacko said:
Locked in rates means less people want to move which means less supply on the market and more people bidding on the existing houses driving up home values to record levels. Anyone here in that situation (wanting to move but have to good of a rate so you essentially can't)?
Click to expand...
Yep. We won’t move unless we can pay cash. The housing market in Anchorage has not kept up with areas we’d like to move to.
 
anonymoose said:
Yep. We won’t move unless we can pay cash. The housing market in Anchorage has not kept up with areas we’d like to move to.
Click to expand...
If one moves from California to almost anywhere they are going to (likely) end up in a better situation. But for anyone else trying to move within their same area or something like you described, it's going to (likely) be more costly. And in that scenario, unless you have to move you likely won't.
 
cawacko said:
If one moves from California to almost anywhere they are going to (likely) end up in a better situation. But for anyone else trying to move within their same area or something like you described, it's going to (likely) be more costly. And in that scenario, unless you have to move you likely won't.
Click to expand...
We COULD cash in on our house in Hawaii but that’s wifey’s baby. :cautious:
 
cawacko said:
I've never suggested the federal government doesn't play a role in the increasing costs of housing, it does. What I've said is the largest issues are at the state and local level and focusing on the President (as the solution) misses much of what is going on.
Click to expand...
But it remains, that government, at all levels, is the party most responsible for the rise in home prices and building costs.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
But it remains, that government, at all levels, is the party most responsible for the rise in home prices and building costs.
Click to expand...
Yes BUT you cannot leave out NIMBYs. You want to see people on the right and left come together with a quickness? Tell them there’s about to be a new development in their neighborhood..

NIMBYs abuse govt regulations to prevent new development and they work to elect those who share their NIMBY views (whether Republican or Democrat).

Remember Trump’s comment “I’ll protect your suburbs”? Straight up appeal to NIMBYism implying that he would stop development of anything other than single family homes in the suburbs.

You can’t complain about the cost of housing then feel that way about new development. It doesn’t work that way. We have a huge supply issue and addressing it includes building housing other than simply single family homes.
 
cawacko said:
Yes BUT you cannot leave out NIMBYs. You want to see people on the right and left come together with a quickness? Tell them there’s about to be a new development in their neighborhood..

NIMBYs abuse govt regulations to prevent new development and they work to elect those who share their NIMBY views (whether Republican or Democrat).

Remember Trump’s comment “I’ll protect your suburbs”? Straight up appeal to NIMBYism implying that he would stop development of anything other than single family homes in the suburbs.

You can’t complain about the cost of housing then feel that way about new development. It doesn’t work that way. We have a huge supply issue and addressing it includes building housing other than simply single family homes.
Click to expand...
They are using the power of government to do their bidding. They are using the same regulations to stop development that the developer is using to start it.

Most people in single family homes don't want large apartment complexes nearby for several reasons:

Apartments and renters tend to create more crime
Renters don't generally take as good a care of property as an owner
Congestion, and large apartment complexes typically drive down the value of homes nearby
This is particularly true with subsidized housing like section 8 renters.

The issue isn't so much one of what to build, but rather having renters versus owners. Owners are preferable to renters as owners have a vested interest in the property they own, renters do not.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
They are using the power of government to do their bidding. They are using the same regulations to stop development that the developer is using to start it.

Most people in single family homes don't want large apartment complexes nearby for several reasons:

Apartments and renters tend to create more crime
Renters don't generally take as good a care of property as an owner
Congestion, and large apartment complexes typically drive down the value of homes nearby
This is particularly true with subsidized housing like section 8 renters.

The issue isn't so much one of what to build, but rather having renters versus owners. Owners are preferable to renters as owners have a vested interest in the property they own, renters do not.
Click to expand...
You're giving the NIMBY line for stopping development. Some of the most expensive places in the country, NY, SF and LA (among others) don't have large plots of land just sitting there waiting for single family development. We need duplexes, triplexes, apartments complexes, ADUs, being allowed to convert garages etc. All those things play a role in adding to the housing supply which will help bring down prices.

The attitude that we can only build single family homes that are for sale is a perfect playbook if your goal is to exacerbate the current supply crisis and drive prices up even higher.

Edit: And the attitude that we need a higher percentage of home owners in the country is what drove us to the GFC in 2008.
 
Geeko Sportivo said:
Of course, if you leave this up to the next Republican President, they will do absolutely nothing about the crisis.

But, I also believe the next Democratic President will push through a new direly needed Federal Housing Program, because that is the only way to approach the problem now.
Click to expand...
Yet another one, Lizard? What makes you think it will work better than the other ones already out there?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top