Caplan's way to explain these concepts is amazing! Interesting, engaging and ridden with examples. Love these "controversial" ideas, and Caplan's renewed approach to making economics more approachable! Really looking forward to the new book!
It’s almost like there’s a giant group of people that has been in control of the system for the last 60 years and the status quo is incredibly beneficial to them.
Another factor to bring up would be our bygone zoning regulations, they are too restrictive and don't allow for more diverse development (mixed use zoning, modular housing, etc) allowing more different types of housing to be built would benefit us in the long run. I see talks of walkable cities and good public transportation but that can't really be done with our current zoning policies. The question is what can we do on a local or even state level to allow for less restrictions overall?
Thinking of southern California, there is an excessive amount of zoning for retail only with lots of underutilized land, vacant storefronts giant empty parking lots. In my area, I can go to city council meetings when they discuss plans for the next new big box store to occupy a former KMart lot and speak against the NIMBYs. I also write my city council person on occasion voicing these concerns.
Caplan addressed zoning in the speech. He compared Houston (almost no zoning) to the rest of the country and found that there was little to differentiate Houston land usage from the rest of the country. As such, Caplan's opinion on zoning was there was no need for it. People and business will zone themselves naturally, so zoning just prevents development without upside.
Couldn't agree more, I am from Massachusetts and I moved to rural NH and we still have far to many land use regulations but for my family building in MA it's an absolute joke. In one town a pretty rich suburb. Of Boston my sister has been trying for 6 years to build a house on 14 acres and have paid millions for the land and hundreds of thousands for the studies and to try to get approval. I told them to just build in NH 1 hour and 15 min from Boston and it will be a third of the cost but they wanna live 20 min from Boston even though they work remote and only go into the city 4 or 5 times a year haha. She is starting to realize I was right 😂. And it's a bunch of other rich nimby hippies that go to the meetings and raise holy hell about one new house way back in the woods. But they are NIMBYs as well and hate when someone in town doesn't have a mowed lawn or has something they consider unsightly, for the life of me I can never understand why people care about stuff like that..
This was discussed recently in the New Bedford, MA, Standard-Times and the Fairhaven, MA, Fairhaven Neighborhood News. In the Laurel Canyon area of LA, hippie homeowners raised holy hell when big modern houses were built there.
You can always offset the cost of tolls for the poor by reducing sales taxes, which are regressive by nature. Start with food, zero sales taxes on all food items.
No! Start w/reducing govt spending and govt econ regs, eg, Antitrust, EPA. If not, govt will create hidden taxes to pay for votes, eg, the Feds counterfeit money and credit which fund the welfare state and allows statists to claim that the resulting higher prices are caused by "greedy" businessmen.
1:20:00 I believe China’s vacancies and high demand is due to their regulations restricting savings vehicles. Thus to signal wealth people spend their money on buying extra houses that they don’t use to live in. Poly matter’s China series had a video explaining this
40:30 - The point where his whole argument comes crashing down. Caplan's arguments will make a LOT more sense in a world of autonomous vehicles (robo-taxis). But it's a little too early now.
Singapore doesn’t have a bunch of autonomous robo taxis and it does just fine so you haven’t debunked anything. Congestion pricing is the number one way to ensure no traffic when implemented correctly.
Why would autonomous vehicles care more about congestion pricing than people? I mean just look at London; congestion pricing is a miracle cure and Manhattan should’ve done it 20 years ago
Doesn't Caplan say the exact opposite about American homeless in discussing open borders, that they're overwhelmingly characterized by severe addiction and mental illness, such that they have very little in common with immigrants?
The thing that although homeless people are disproportionately characterised by mental illness and addiction(there's reverse causation there especially for drug problems where people get addicted after becoming homeless, 100% of them can't afford housing(especially for the less-visible homeless who might not be on the street or causing trouble etc.). So a freer housing market would make it easier for them to buy and (especially with additional rent control and other regulations) rent a home. It would also make it easier for charitable organisations to support them by giving them a place to stay and other forms of support when housing is cheaper.
@@dustinseth1 Not when the intrinsic cost to build skyscrapers are high, it has less to do with the land itself and just high cost to construct hence building loads of high cost buildings doesn't lower cost overall for housing.
@@4evahodlingdoge226 If they’re so egregiously expensive that they wouldn’t be profitable, then they wouldn’t be built. In either case there’s nothing wrong with repealing regulations.
@@dustinseth1 Not sure if you haven't noticed but every single high rise is marketed as luxury because affordable housing high rises aren't profitable and is almost always done by government at a loss.
Caplan's way to explain these concepts is amazing! Interesting, engaging and ridden with examples. Love these "controversial" ideas, and Caplan's renewed approach to making economics more approachable! Really looking forward to the new book!
It’s almost like there’s a giant group of people that has been in control of the system for the last 60 years and the status quo is incredibly beneficial to them.
One of the most important speeches I have ever heard, great work thank you.
Nice name
Another factor to bring up would be our bygone zoning regulations, they are too restrictive and don't allow for more diverse development (mixed use zoning, modular housing, etc) allowing more different types of housing to be built would benefit us in the long run. I see talks of walkable cities and good public transportation but that can't really be done with our current zoning policies. The question is what can we do on a local or even state level to allow for less restrictions overall?
Thinking of southern California, there is an excessive amount of zoning for retail only with lots of underutilized land, vacant storefronts giant empty parking lots.
In my area, I can go to city council meetings when they discuss plans for the next new big box store to occupy a former KMart lot and speak against the NIMBYs. I also write my city council person on occasion voicing these concerns.
Caplan addressed zoning in the speech. He compared Houston (almost no zoning) to the rest of the country and found that there was little to differentiate Houston land usage from the rest of the country. As such, Caplan's opinion on zoning was there was no need for it. People and business will zone themselves naturally, so zoning just prevents development without upside.
Amazing talk!
This seems to be a global problem, so we should translate this book for other countries as well
Couldn't agree more, I am from Massachusetts and I moved to rural NH and we still have far to many land use regulations but for my family building in MA it's an absolute joke. In one town a pretty rich suburb. Of Boston my sister has been trying for 6 years to build a house on 14 acres and have paid millions for the land and hundreds of thousands for the studies and to try to get approval. I told them to just build in NH 1 hour and 15 min from Boston and it will be a third of the cost but they wanna live 20 min from Boston even though they work remote and only go into the city 4 or 5 times a year haha. She is starting to realize I was right 😂. And it's a bunch of other rich nimby hippies that go to the meetings and raise holy hell about one new house way back in the woods. But they are NIMBYs as well and hate when someone in town doesn't have a mowed lawn or has something they consider unsightly, for the life of me I can never understand why people care about stuff like that..
This was discussed recently in the New Bedford, MA, Standard-Times and the Fairhaven, MA, Fairhaven Neighborhood News. In the Laurel Canyon area of LA, hippie homeowners raised holy hell when big modern houses were built there.
You can always offset the cost of tolls for the poor by reducing sales taxes, which are regressive by nature. Start with food, zero sales taxes on all food items.
No! Start w/reducing govt spending and govt econ regs, eg, Antitrust, EPA. If not, govt will create hidden taxes to pay for votes, eg, the Feds counterfeit money and credit which fund the welfare state and allows statists to claim that the resulting higher prices are caused by "greedy" businessmen.
Great talk, can't wait for this book to be released!
1:20:00
I believe China’s vacancies and high demand is due to their regulations restricting savings vehicles. Thus to signal wealth people spend their money on buying extra houses that they don’t use to live in. Poly matter’s China series had a video explaining this
Who runs this YT channel? How do we get in touch with the channel manager?
Based
40:30 - The point where his whole argument comes crashing down.
Caplan's arguments will make a LOT more sense in a world of autonomous vehicles (robo-taxis). But it's a little too early now.
Agreed
Singapore doesn’t have a bunch of autonomous robo taxis and it does just fine so you haven’t debunked anything. Congestion pricing is the number one way to ensure no traffic when implemented correctly.
Why would autonomous vehicles care more about congestion pricing than people? I mean just look at London; congestion pricing is a miracle cure and Manhattan should’ve done it 20 years ago
Also we have autonomous trains
@@evanfreund5651 because, once all vehicles are autonomous, there will be no congestion
Well I mean is it really your property if other people get a say in it? no it's not.
Or if govt can steal it for non-payment of property taxes, probably supported by Right and Left.
Doesn't Caplan say the exact opposite about American homeless in discussing open borders, that they're overwhelmingly characterized by severe addiction and mental illness, such that they have very little in common with immigrants?
The thing that although homeless people are disproportionately characterised by mental illness and addiction(there's reverse causation there especially for drug problems where people get addicted after becoming homeless, 100% of them can't afford housing(especially for the less-visible homeless who might not be on the street or causing trouble etc.). So a freer housing market would make it easier for them to buy and (especially with additional rent control and other regulations) rent a home. It would also make it easier for charitable organisations to support them by giving them a place to stay and other forms of support when housing is cheaper.
Building more skyscrapers aren't going to bring forth affordable housing for the middle class.
How would it not? More supply lowers prices
@@dustinseth1 Not when the intrinsic cost to build skyscrapers are high, it has less to do with the land itself and just high cost to construct hence building loads of high cost buildings doesn't lower cost overall for housing.
@@4evahodlingdoge226 If they’re so egregiously expensive that they wouldn’t be profitable, then they wouldn’t be built. In either case there’s nothing wrong with repealing regulations.
@@dustinseth1 Not sure if you haven't noticed but every single high rise is marketed as luxury because affordable housing high rises aren't profitable and is almost always done by government at a loss.
@@4evahodlingdoge226I wonder why they aren’t profitable? Maybe you should watch the very talk under which you’re commenting.