Tags: california | housing | affordability | deregulation

California's Housing Construction Constipation

California's Housing Construction Constipation
(Edgar Hernandez/Dreamstime.com)

By with Michael R. Shannon
Monday, 11 November 2019 10:45 AM Current | Bio | Archive

SFGate recently ran a comparison between what $800,000 would get a home-buyer in San Francisco compared with what the same amount of money would buy in San Antonio. Our first thought was why $800K?

That’s a lot of money. So much money that it’s $573,000 more than the median cost of a home in the USA, which is only $227,000. Then it occurred to us — you can’t find a livable home in San Francisco that costs less than 800K.

The example home in SF was under 1,000 sq. feet in size, making it much smaller than the median home size in the USA of 2,426 sq. feet. It was extensively remodeled and listed for $788,000. But it really shouldn’t have been included in the comparison because the house sold for over $1 million.

In San Antonio, $769,900 gets the buyer 2,400 sq. feet more than the San Francisco home with “all the modern fixtures and amenities you could expect in a newer home. The listing says the master suite and bathroom ‘rival any 5-star hotel.’” Plus, as this is written, San Antonio hasn’t felt it necessary to sponsor an app that warns city pedestrians regarding sidewalks that are spattered with human poop.

Dependency and cultural decline advocates claim that housing prices like San Francisco’s are the major contributor to the “homeless crisis.” That’s mostly spin. The few individuals on the street due to unaffordable housing are mostly used by reporters to cover up the thousands more on the street due to mental illness, drug or alcohol addiction, an oppositional lifestyle, or a criminal lifestyle.

But just for fun, let’s play along and examine the unaffordability question. What can California and San Francisco do to create affordable housing? The choice the left — which runs the state — made is expensive, taxpayer-fleecing government housing. Is that the only way?

The Sacramento Bee reports President Trump’s “advisers say in a new report that California could cut San Francisco’s homeless population in half” without government building so much as a lean-to.

“The report, called the State of Homelessness in America, urges California and other Democratic-majority states to deregulate their housing industries in the interest of building more affordable homes.”

Using the word “deregulate” will be enough to kill any chances the recommendations might be adopted. The left will contend this “deregulation” will allow rapacious developers to throw up thousands of corrugated metal and tar paper shacks that would leave the state looking like a favela in Brazil.

Only that wouldn’t be true. (Not that untruthfulness is any impediment to the left.) All San Francisco has to do is make “the city’s building codes more like the ones in development-friendly Arizona.”

“The White House notes four of the five U.S. cities with the highest rates of homelessness are in California, and nearly half of all unsheltered homeless people are found in the Golden State.

“California was home to about 130,000 homeless people in January 2018, according to the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness. The report contends that other warm-weather states, such as Florida and Arizona, have ‘low’ homelessness rates in contrast to California.”

A reasonable person would conclude if the weather isn’t the determining factor it must be the regulatory climate and the indulgence of degeneracy by city hall.

The report lists problematic housing regulations as rent control, “excessive energy and water-efficiency mandates,” maximum-density allowances, historic preservation codes and “cumbersome” permitting processes.

The question is which is more important to California leftists? Creating housing opportunities by adopting building codes that have proven successful in Arizona or keeping regulation constipation?

We’ll know the answer in 2020 when statistics for new housing starts in San Francisco are published.

Michael Reagan, the eldest son of President Reagan, is a Newsmax TV analyst. A syndicated columnist and author, he chairs The Reagan Legacy Foundation. Michael is an in-demand speaker with Premiere speaker’s bureau. Read more reports from Michael Reagan — Go Here Now.

Michael R. Shannon is a commentator, researcher for the League of American Voters, and an award-winning political and advertising consultant with nationwide and international experience. He is author of "Conservative Christian’s Guidebook for Living in Secular Times (Now with added humor!)." Read more of Michael Shannon's reports — Go Here Now.

© Mike Reagan

   
1Like our page
2Share
Reagan
SFGate recently ran a comparison between what $800,000 would get a home-buyer in San Francisco compared with what the same amount of money would buy in San Antonio. Our first thought was why $800K?
california, housing, affordability, deregulation
703
2019-45-11
Monday, 11 November 2019 10:45 AM
Newsmax Media, Inc.
 

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

NEWSMAX.COM
America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved