Not Floyd himself. The arson. The looting. The violent riots. The mainstreaming of BLM and Defund/Abolish the Police. Remember? Those things happened and the epicenter was Minneapolis in 2020.

What I'm suggesting is that housing costs are not univariate and that over the period depicted in those graphs it's unlikely that Minneapolis figured out some optimal housing supply policy that stabilized costs relative to inflation but it was instead a combination of many factors that made them so unique amoungst the cities depicted and maybe one of those factors was the violent, dangerous, whole-of-society changing events that occurred in that location in the same time period being analyzed.

The housing market did NOT experience any signifcant shift due to Floyd. It just didnt happen. It pretty much stayed the course commennsurate with markets across the country with low interest rates and lack of housing.

Floyd unrest "looting and violence" etc lasted how long? It just didnt impact housing.

and when i say "floyd", i know you didnt fucking mean George Floyd himself (he died remember) i mean the entire unrest due to Floyd.

The area that Floyd unrest happened was already an area of lower income housing, some poverty, and vacancies, and a more....i cant say dilapated area anymore but....

Downtown MPLS was already struggling with commercial vacancies and lack of general interest in downtown core

I heard a rumor that St. Paul passed rent control and immediately housing developers pulled the plug on projects there. Tell us more about this.

I don't know anything about that specifically, but they've got the Democratic trifecta: Dem governor, Dem-controlled legislature, and Dem mayors in the Twin Cities. I'm already sorry for Strat because it's going to become Boston.

It seems that landlords can apply for exemptions and easily obtain them citing various reasons as inflation, increased construction costs, and a right to return on investment.

https://www.twincities.com/2023/05/28/o ... s-pile-up/

City backtracked big time after permits fell. Now landlords can apply for extensions and some of the biggest developers are getting sweetheart tax deals.

Boston Seattle

Potato potahto

Begs the question: have any states spent the last 4 years getting it right? Has any state used policy to produce a demonstrable change in the percent of income spent on rent? Or does it just come down to, how many people are there per square mile in the area you want to move into?

So did Minneapolis build a bunch of new housing because St. Paul passed rent control?

Builders yanked permits and moved them over to the other side of the river?

dunno but developers/investors are starting to snag up vacant office buildings downtown MPLS for a fraction of the cost in hopes of revitalization of the downtown.

I don't think there's a single-scale solution. It will require various interventions at the Federal/State/County/Local levels, plus active participation from the private sector. Just spitballing here:

Federal:
-intervene in PE purchases of real estate
-Create a second round of qualified opportunity zone eligibilities (this is in the pipeline)
-Figure out an immigration and naturalization pathway that pumps tax-accountable juice into the construction labor force
-Federal minimum wage hike

State:
-Cede control back to the local governments where applicable (mostly red states)
-Create low-interest debt funding pools for targeted construction loans

County:
-Overhaul zoning codes for rural areas that lack the government knowledge to even make sense of a zoning plat or request for variance (this is huge, in my experience)

City:
-Limit or ban AirBnB/VRBO within certain parameters
-Allow for mixed-use development
-Figure out the ADU prohibitions that make sense for your municipality

Private industry:
-Stop trying to apply venture capital to f'n real estate
-Create opportunities for employee participation in enterprise upside

there you go, I just solved it.

While I’m generally pretty quick to dismiss predictions or assumptions of success (versus demonstrated historical evidence), I think your solution seems obviously destined to work. It sounds really, really good.

It also sounds like the answer to my (much less important) question is “no, there isn’t any part of the country we can point to that has spent the last 4 years achieving provable reductions in this problem through their currently enacted policies.”

Well your question is poorly formed, because it presumes there's a single set of policies that would A) work in one place, and therefore B) be transferrable to another place. So that's what I was responding to.

I also think that four years is an arbitrary number of measurement in its own right, but is then amplified because of covid. QOZ funds are structured as 10-year holdings, so you've got a ton of real estate that will revert to market rate in the next several years. And of course PPP loans propped up a lot of entities that have only recently had to vacate their commercial real estate.

And bare in mind that AirBnB STILL hasn't demonstrated any retained earnings.

Trag for pres

I’m not accusing you of not answering my question. I asked it because this topic usually boils down to blues and reds attacking each other for failing to solve the problem, without bothering to address their own lack of successes. Lots of “lmao look at how these people are doing it wrong,” and very little self-reflecting.

I was and am curious if anybody has an “everyone should be looking to this working model for guidance” example that shows a provable difference being made. But I also agree that your approach would succeed, which is why I referred to my question as much less important.