Hampton Branch Library
Moving the Goalposts
RECEIVED Fri., Jan. 31, 2020
Dear Editor,
I appreciate Nick Barbaro's column, "More Unintended Consequences," ["Public Notice," News, Jan. 31], attempting to make the counterintuitive case that building more housing will not make housing prices more affordable. Specifically, he said, "the fact that 'market rate' new housing in Austin is pretty much defined as being affordable for families making 120% of median income and up – that is, the top 40% of earners. Nothing's really being built for less than that except government-subsidized affordable housing … No amount of new, market rate construction is going to change the price curve for the bottom 50% of earners."
I suspect Nick is trying to cherry-pick the data by defining housing as only single-family homes, since a quick Google search of median household income in Austin ($65,756) and the definition of cost-burdened households (those that pay more than 30% of gross income on rent) yields about $1,650 as the median monthly apartment rent threshold – which is considerably lower than the median rental cost of a brand-new apartment.
Nick is definitely moving the goalposts, though, since brand-new single-family houses or luxury apartments are not the go-to for poor people. And he's factually wrong in saying that "no amount" of new housing will bend the cost curve for people at or below the median income. Ask any Realtor what would happen to housing or rental prices if, say, 200,000 new housing units were built in Austin in 2020 – not that any sane construction firms would knowingly create such a loss-inducing glut.
The real issue for affordability of housing for poor people – people well below that $65K median – is political. Specifically, one of the primary concerns of a person who lives the Chron's new mission statement, "committed to a progressive point of view," should be compassion towards those less well off. And yet, the policy enacted by ostensibly progressive politicians in Austin is to make it illegal for a private developer to build truly affordable tiny microapartments – say, 100 square feet or less – or to have enough people living in currently legal sized apartments to achieve the same effect.
I look forward to Nick Barbaro's column defending the "progressive" politicians enforcing these heartless policies that harm the least fortunate among us.
I appreciate Nick Barbaro's column, "More Unintended Consequences," ["Public Notice," News, Jan. 31], attempting to make the counterintuitive case that building more housing will not make housing prices more affordable. Specifically, he said, "the fact that 'market rate' new housing in Austin is pretty much defined as being affordable for families making 120% of median income and up – that is, the top 40% of earners. Nothing's really being built for less than that except government-subsidized affordable housing … No amount of new, market rate construction is going to change the price curve for the bottom 50% of earners."
I suspect Nick is trying to cherry-pick the data by defining housing as only single-family homes, since a quick Google search of median household income in Austin ($65,756) and the definition of cost-burdened households (those that pay more than 30% of gross income on rent) yields about $1,650 as the median monthly apartment rent threshold – which is considerably lower than the median rental cost of a brand-new apartment.
Nick is definitely moving the goalposts, though, since brand-new single-family houses or luxury apartments are not the go-to for poor people. And he's factually wrong in saying that "no amount" of new housing will bend the cost curve for people at or below the median income. Ask any Realtor what would happen to housing or rental prices if, say, 200,000 new housing units were built in Austin in 2020 – not that any sane construction firms would knowingly create such a loss-inducing glut.
The real issue for affordability of housing for poor people – people well below that $65K median – is political. Specifically, one of the primary concerns of a person who lives the Chron's new mission statement, "committed to a progressive point of view," should be compassion towards those less well off. And yet, the policy enacted by ostensibly progressive politicians in Austin is to make it illegal for a private developer to build truly affordable tiny microapartments – say, 100 square feet or less – or to have enough people living in currently legal sized apartments to achieve the same effect.
I look forward to Nick Barbaro's column defending the "progressive" politicians enforcing these heartless policies that harm the least fortunate among us.
Jim Henshaw