What would make housing affordable?
Would building more housing outperform the price controls and financing interventions intended to make it affordable?
What’s at stake
Housing policy has to address people who need relief now and people who cannot find a home at all. The recurring supply argument connects zoning, construction costs and investment incentives. It asks why demand for homes does not translate into enough new places to live.
The ideas that connect
Permission and construction cost are separate barriers
Mahan and Hilton both identify insufficient supply, but the mechanism goes beyond zoning. A project can be permitted in principle and still fail because fees, building requirements, litigation or delay make it too expensive. Mahan’s condominium example adds a consequence: barriers can eliminate an entry route to ownership, not merely raise the price of a detached house.
Supporting passages
2026-03-23
Look, I think it's fundamentally a supply problem. We've seen most recently in Austin, we saw in Seattle, we've seen in dozens of markets around the country that when we remove barriers to the market, investing in housing to meet growing demand, you slow down cost increases. It's economics 101 Part of our challenge is that we've also made it impossible to build affordably. So part of the challenge was zoning, high fees, all of the things government imposes that block housing from getting built. But we also have a building code that's incredibly cumbersome. I mentioned litigation earlier when it came to high-speed rail. Same thing is true for housing. We're not building condos in California, partly because construction defect liability allows a trial lawyer to come in in year nine of a project.
Open the source and seek to the timestamp above.
2026-04-29
But I don't think that's the major driver. The major driver is the fact that we just haven't built enough housing of different kinds. If you go through the reasons for that and why it's so expensive, it brings into play these three factors. First of all, it just costs more to build anything in California. The same exact floor plan, house, apartment building, industrial building, whatever it is, costs just two or three times more to build in California than in neighboring states. The first reason is the building codes, the actual requirements for construction, which is way more onerous driven by climate dogma that actually doesn't really provide much climate benefit.
Open the source and seek to the timestamp above.
Tenant protections also affect the next building
Rent restrictions can help existing tenants while changing the expected return on maintenance and new construction. The investment argument is that limiting future income without reducing costs can discourage supply. The later permitting discussion presents a different lever: expand the number of homes competing for tenants. These policies operate on different timescales, so immediate relief and long-run availability should not be treated as interchangeable.
Supporting passages
2025-11-14
Your upside, the amount of cash flows that you can generate from that asset, meaning the apartment building you're buying, is now limited by the amount that you can increase the rent every year. So that creates a disincentive for capital for investors to buy new buildings or put money into upgrading buildings or put money into building new buildings. At the same time, as we know, the city of Los Angeles, the state of California, and the federal government of the United States, have passed law after law, regulation after regulation, statute after statute has gone into effect. That makes it more expensive, take more time and more difficult to build housing. The increase in regulation combined with the cap in the economic access to free markets, I think has made it increasingly difficult for there to be a free flow of capital to go and build new housing and develop units for people to live in and for sale.
Open the source and seek to the timestamp above.
2026-07-24
The data from Austin says, once you relax the permitting constraint, you'll get more units built, and for every unit that comes online, it literally drives down the rent. If you want low rent, you need to have more units. If you want more units, you need to permit more aggressively. That's it. It's just a decision. The same political will that it would take Mamdani to pass this law, he could actually pass some permitting reform and it would do a lot more good.
Open the source and seek to the timestamp above.
The useful outcome is delivered homes
Austin repeatedly serves as an example of the supply mechanism, while California illustrates how barriers can accumulate. The broader lesson is to connect reform to completed units and their costs. A promise to deregulate is not enough if the remaining rules still prevent a viable project. Nor does announcing a construction target show whether new homes reach renters and first-time buyers.
Supporting passages
2026-03-23
Look, I think it's fundamentally a supply problem. We've seen most recently in Austin, we saw in Seattle, we've seen in dozens of markets around the country that when we remove barriers to the market, investing in housing to meet growing demand, you slow down cost increases. It's economics 101 Part of our challenge is that we've also made it impossible to build affordably. So part of the challenge was zoning, high fees, all of the things government imposes that block housing from getting built. But we also have a building code that's incredibly cumbersome. I mentioned litigation earlier when it came to high-speed rail. Same thing is true for housing. We're not building condos in California, partly because construction defect liability allows a trial lawyer to come in in year nine of a project.
Open the source and seek to the timestamp above.
2026-07-24
The data from Austin says, once you relax the permitting constraint, you'll get more units built, and for every unit that comes online, it literally drives down the rent. If you want low rent, you need to have more units. If you want more units, you need to permit more aggressively. That's it. It's just a decision. The same political will that it would take Mamdani to pass this law, he could actually pass some permitting reform and it would do a lot more good.
Open the source and seek to the timestamp above.
What remains unresolved
Which barriers actually prevent construction, and which reforms produce homes people can afford? Judge supply, costs and tenant outcomes together rather than treating a single city comparison as a universal answer.
A selected guide · September 2025–September 4, 2026 · Sources and method