# We should have housing policies like Tokyo **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 7, 2019, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291 "2019-08-07T14:07:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2019, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291/121 "2019-08-12T01:33:55Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > So explain? I think it is very controversial. Explain why it does. I have covered this in previous posts. Please check them out, and if you want to debate it, quote the parts I’ve argued that I disagree with - but I’m not just going to repeat myself. But when Nobel Prize winning economists like Krugman and the architect of the Swedish welfare system, Gunnar Myrdal, tell people it is foolish to think that rent control is good economic policy, people should listen. > [@](#): > > Where? You dont mean this cite: I do not. When speaking of the mayor saying that he’s aware of construction projects being delayed or cancelled, I linked to the article that reported the mayor saying that thing. I did not read a HUD webpage and fictionalize the views of the San Jose mayor. > [@](#): > > Because you see- Rent Control in San Jose _does not pertain in the slightest_ to new construction. Nothing built after 1979 is under rent control. What sense does that possibly make? If rent control helps people, why should it apply only to old housing? My theory is that as locales realized that rent control is a failed policy, they relaxed those rules to encourage investors to build units that they would not have. This theory seems to be common sense, and fully supports the consensus of economists. Plus, I can’t think of any other rational explanation for old vs. new policy. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2019, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291/122 "2019-08-12T02:10:19Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > My theory is that as locales realized that rent control is a failed policy, they relaxed those rules to encourage investors to build units that they would not have. This theory seems to be common sense, and fully supports the consensus of economists. Plus, I can’t think of any other rational explanation for old vs. new policy. Dunno about the situation in San Jose, but here in Paris rent control overwhelmingly applies (or rather, city halls \*tries \*to make it apply ; and the landlord unions dogs them at every turn) to buildings that fall under _monuments historiques_, i.e. housing old and pretty enough that they’ve become living museums that simply can’t be torn down or even remodelled ; as well as other housing which can’t be demolished or built higher for other reasons. The most common of which being that, Paris being built over a rabbit-hole mess of older Paris and subway lines and catacombs and disused mushroom-growing tunnels or limestone quarries like many old European towns, if you start messing around in there with heavy machinery or try to dig foundations deep enough for a big-ass tower, half the neighbourhood risks becoming one big cave-in. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2019, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291/123 "2019-08-12T03:30:21Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I have covered this in previous posts. Please check them out, and if you want to debate it, quote the parts I’ve argued that I disagree with - but I’m not just going to repeat myself. > > But when Nobel Prize winning economists like Krugman and the architect of the Swedish welfare system, Gunnar Myrdal, tell people it is foolish to think that rent control is good economic policy, people should listen. > > I do not. When speaking of the mayor saying that he’s aware of construction projects being delayed or cancelled, I linked to the article that reported the mayor saying that thing. I did not read a HUD webpage and fictionalize the views of the San Jose mayor. > … > > My theory is that as locales realized that rent control is a failed policy, they relaxed those rules to encourage investors to build units that they would not have. This theory seems to be common sense, and fully supports the consensus of economists. Plus, I can’t think of any other rational explanation for old vs. new policy. This is a different thread. “My post (from years ago) is my cite” doesnt work. Appeal to authority fallacy. In what post did you make that cite about the mayor of SJ? “Fictionalize”? Your theory is totally incorrect. The law is the same, more or less, since put on the books. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2019, 12:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291/124 "2019-08-12T12:04:51Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > This is a different thread. “My post (from years ago) is my cite” doesnt work. All you have to do is look on the last two pages of this thread for my posts. > [@](#): > > Appeal to authority fallacy. Are you seriously saying that it is a fallacy to refer to the conclusions of award-winning experts in their field, on a matter that is precisely within their field of expertise? > [@](#): > > In what post did you make that cite about the mayor of SJ? Click back one page and look at my post where I mention the mayor. > [@](#): > > Your theory is totally incorrect. The law is the same, more or less, since put on the books. You aren’t defending why it make sense only to have tenants in old buildings covered by rent control. Answer the question. ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2019, 12:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291/125 "2019-08-12T12:43:35Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > No, it can’t. The “market” is made up of a lot of evil greedy people out to make a quick cheap buck at the expense of others, leaving behind a stinking mess they no longer care about. Like increasing accessibility to affordable housing. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2019, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291/126 "2019-08-12T15:51:24Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > All you have to do is look on the last two pages of this thread for my posts. > … > Click back one page and look at my post where I mention the mayor. > You aren’t defending why it make sense only to have tenants in old buildings covered by rent control. Answer the question. You cant provide a link? You cant provide a post #? answer mine first. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2019, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291/127 "2019-08-12T17:47:24Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > You cant provide a link? > > You cant provide a post #? > > answer mine first. Go to page two. Hit control F, search for mayor. Click that link in my post. If you don’t read what I have written in the last 24 hours, I’m not going to do the work to repost what I’ve already provided, make a link to what you’ve ignored, or physically move your eyeballs for you. ---
**Author:** ![Corry\_El](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecae2f/32.png) [@Corry\_El](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Corry_El)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2019, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291/128 "2019-08-12T17:52:36Z")
Going back to the beginning, direct comparisons of Japan to Western developed countries tend to be suspect. I agree with the broad consensus of economists, nearly universal, that rent controls don’t work. If they are very ‘mild’ and/or lots of go arounds, then they don’t really do what their proponents want them to. A supposed finding that NY rent controls\* didn’t prevent a lot of building has to be compared to the fact that it hasn’t been perceived to control rents all that much overall either. What most real systems of rent control do is bifurcate the market into a higher priced ‘free market’ segment and a lower priced controlled segment. Absolutely comprehensive control doesn’t exist in the US. Nor of course is any form of control common in the US. It’s mainly in a couple of the very most expensive places (NY and SF areas), yet strangely does not make them not be expensive. 🙂 I think actually it’s pretty obvious to common sense that rent controls can’t accomplish a lot. Which isn’t to say they can’t accomplish anything for anybody ever. There are few even obviously bad policies, overall, which can’t get over _that_ hurdle. As to landlords supporting rent controls that’s virtually never really true, but not really relevant. In general as has been stated, landlords would prefer to charge infinite rent, tenants would prefer to pay nothing. So obviously LL’s don’t like controls at less than infinite, just like they don’t like the fact that rents are far below infinite in the 90 whatever % of US rentals with no rent control. But rent control is a visible policy that could be changed. Anyway finding some odd landlord who likes rent controls doesn’t show that it’s a good policy, which it’s pretty obviously not. Or at best a policy with very limited benefit. \*which includes the older system ‘Rent Control’, and the newer one ‘Rent Stabilization’. At this point Rent Control is practically irrelevant but Rent Stabilized units number over 1 million, and that system was just pretty drastically tightened, in terms of go arounds, earlier this year. Though there will still be a large non-controlled segment, where rents will go because the supply via RS units being decontrolled will decrease, and nothing in the law changed to encourage construction of market units. In fact the narrow defeat of a provision what would have made rent increases more than 1.5 the inflation rate illegal _anywhere_ in the City will probably have a significant chilling effect on all construction. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2019, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291/129 "2019-08-12T18:00:51Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Go to page two. Hit control F, search for mayor. Click that link in my post. [This just illustrates your anti-Mac bias. It’s like, command + F there :). Because I’m helpful, here is a link.](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=21800395&postcount=100) ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2019, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291/130 "2019-08-12T18:13:35Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > [This just illustrates your anti-Mac bias. It’s like, command + F there :). Because I’m helpful, here is a link.](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=21800395&postcount=100) I view all keys as equals, no better and no worse than others. Whether command or control, let us all rejoice in the multi key nation that has given us so much. Except PrntScn. Fuck that key. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2019, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291/131 "2019-08-12T19:55:20Z")
It seems a better compromise on rent control would be limited term rent control. Make it for 5 years or so, rent can only be raised by 5% (or so) a year, and at the beginning of the fourth year, the tenant is given the terms for the next period, and has a year to decide if they want to pay the increase or move. That gives some stability to the renter, but also prevents people from staying forever in a place at a fraction of market value. Also, micro-housing should be approved and encouraged, especially in and around high job areas. If you live less than a block from where you work, and can get all the amenities you need within a short distance, some may not mind having little more than a bed and a bathroom. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2019, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291/132 "2019-08-12T23:10:44Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Go to page two. Hit control F, search for mayor. Click that link in my post. > > If you don’t read what I have written in the last 24 hours, I’m not going to do the work to repost what I’ve already provided, make a link to what you’ve ignored, or physically move your eyeballs for you. Man, tying a number must be HARD. Psst the answer is 100. \*Mayor Sam Liccardo, who led the push to study the policy, said the restriction may possibly be hurting housing production in San Jose. The mayor said he’s heard of developers not moving forward with housing projects potentially because of the Ellis Act ordinance…Liccardo said he knew of at least three housing projects negatively impacted by the law. But the city’s housing director Jacky Morales-Ferrand said that the department can’t say whether the projects Liccardo referred to didn’t move forward because of the Ellis Act ordinance. “Ellis is designed to make developers pay,” she said. “But is this Ellis ordinance designed so it’s acting as a barrier? Is it the fundamental reason that development is not going forward is the question.”\* Note the following words “may” “possibly” “heard of” . Liccardo is a known tool of the developers. Note that the experts disagreed with him. The Ellis Act Ordinance only applies when a developer plans to demolish rent-controled apartments from the rental market. This ordinance requires 50% of new apartments built on the site of previously rent-controled apartments be subject to the Apartment Rent Ordinance. Later in that same link \*"Thousands of new affordable units On Monday, San Jose’s Housing Department announced that it had dedicated $100 million to build 1,144 affordable units. Just a day later at the Feb. 5 City Council meeting, the council made a commitment for additional funding for 249 of those units. The three developments, located on Page, North 21st and Balbach streets, are the first wave of 11 new affordable housing projects. If all 11 move forward, it will push the city over 20 percent of the way to meeting its goal of building 10,000 new affordable units by 2022. S\* ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2019, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291/133 "2019-08-12T23:46:04Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > Also, micro-housing should be approved and encouraged, especially in and around high job areas. If you live less than a block from where you work, and can get all the amenities you need within a short distance, some may not mind having little more than a bed and a bathroom. Meh. You know, not everyone who wants to live in an urban area near their office is a childless singleton, content to cram themselves into something resembling their college dorm room. I’d like to see more 3+ bedroom homes for people like with kids who actually like city living. > [@DrDeth](#): > > No, it can’t. The “market” is made up of a lot of evil greedy people out to make a quick cheap buck at the expense of others, leaving behind a stinking mess they no longer care about. And when those “evil greedy people” can’t make a quick cheap buck, they don’t invest in new developments that would increase the number of units available. > [@DrDeth](#): > > And you can’t just plop down a 20 story apt building in the middle of the suburbs. Not enough infrastructure. Depends what you mean by “suburb”. I was reading an article awhile back about a growing trend of development in suburban “satellite cities” around major metropolitan areas. For New York City, that would include smaller cities like Jersey City, Hoboken, Fort Lee, Weehawken, Secaucus and Newark in New Jersey; White Plains, NY; Stamford and Norwalk in Connecticut. Probably a number of others I can’t think of off the top of my head. The characteristics of these smaller cities include the following: - Home to large corporate offices - Development of “downtown” areas with their own restaurants, bars, shopping, and other amenities - Rail and other public transportation links to New York City. Many of these cities have their own major transportation hubs. - Massive influx of multi-family condos and even luxury high rise buildings. To your point, what I see when I drive around the tri-state area are a fair number of 20+ story condo towers plopped in what appears to be the middle of nowhere. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2019, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291/134 "2019-08-13T00:36:37Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > Well, concrete jungles have their own downside(s), and what’s possible in Japan due to their strong cultural community values of is not necessarily workable elsewhere. So I wouldn’t call for an absolutely unrestricted license to build. Unless you really like Mumbai for some reason. > But I agree there’s a more sensible middle to be reached than preserving residential suburbia. I have nothing against residential suburbia! I grew up in residential suburbia, and I’ve lived in residential suburbia for most of my adult life, including right now. But it’s a tremendous waste of scarce infrastructure to surround a subway stop with single-family tract housing. The best way to fully utilize it is to enable as many people to live or work within walking distance of that stop as want to live or work there. You want several thousand, not several dozen, people walking to that station every day. And since I said “within a quarter-mile” that’s not exactly going to create Mumbai. Well, maybe a number of very, very small Mumbais. Though again, if I were the housing god, I’d have some rule for extending the radius once the quarter-mile was built to sufficient density that there were no longer any obvious tear-down-and-build-higher candidates within the circle. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2019, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291/135 "2019-08-13T01:06:58Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Man, tying a number must be HARD. Its harder than you reading the thread, I guess. Now that I answered your question - before you asked it by the way - will you respond to my question - do you actually believe it is a fallacy to cite award winning economists on matters within their expertise? > [@](#): > > Liccardo is a known tool of the developers. Note that the experts disagreed with him. Ad hominem, and then pending your answer to the previous question, it may qualify as your version of an “appeal to authority.” > [@](#): > > On Monday, San Jose’s Housing Department announced that it had dedicated $100 million to build 1,144 affordable units. Just a day later at the Feb. 5 City Council meeting, the council made a commitment for additional funding for 249 of those units. When markets work, the government doesn’t have to subsidize real estate developers. You ought to be outraged that your tax dollars are going into landlords’ pockets in this way. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2019, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291/136 "2019-08-13T01:29:18Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Its harder than you reading the thread, I guess. > > Now that I answered your question - … > When markets work, the government doesn’t have to subsidize real estate developers. You ought to be outraged that your tax dollars are going into landlords’ pockets in this way. Indeed, going back and scanning every one of 134 posts is hard than you typing in “100”. No, you \*didn’t \*answer my question. You were being deliberately evasive that appeared to me, just to be annoying. “When markets work…”, this is a economic fallacy. > **[R-Olseninvisiblehand.pdf](https://fxtrade.oanda.com/documents/R-Olseninvisiblehand.pdf)** > > 72.23 KB _Since the inception of classical economics over 200 years ago, one of the most sacred assumptions has been the hypothesis that an invisible hand determines market prices and that market prices follow a random walk. Today, there exists significant statistical evidence that this is not the case and we need to acknowledge that financial markets are, indeed, predictable. How is this possible? … For Adam Smith and his followers, it was clear that division of labour would only develop within the context of a free market economy with competitive prices. At the time, governments had firm control of market pricing. Smith believed that to unleash the forces of the market and foster competition, it would be necessary to free markets from this control. The ‘invisible hand’ Early economists used their theories to argue their policy recommendations, which in turn influenced the very way their theories developed. Under no circumstances did they want to develop a theory of the advantages of the market economy that could be attacked as being unfair, i.e. inequitable to society. Thus was born the concept of the ‘invisible hand’. They argued that an efficient market has such a large volume that any one participant has a negligible impact on the market as a whole. Because any one participant is so small (relatively speaking) and insignificant, it was concluded that everyone behaves in the same way. Economists thus postulated that man behaves like a ‘homo oeconomicus’ who is rational and maximises his utility. From this they inferred that everyone reacts in the same way to market events and that market reactions to outside events are thus homogeneous, with no secondary reactions. ,"_ > **[Fallacies of Free Markets](https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2011/fallacies-free-markets/70151)** > > 3p is proud to partner with the Presidio Graduate School’s Macroeconomics course on a blogging series about the economics of sustainability. This post is part of that series.  > > By Justin Semion > > The Your Adam Smith Invisible hand is a outdated concept from 1776, proven wrong by many economists since then. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2019, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291/137 "2019-08-13T02:02:33Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > No, you \*didn’t \*answer my question. You were being deliberately evasive that appeared to me, just to be annoying. You asked about the link for the mayor quote. I told you I already posted it, and you refused to look. You asked why rent control doesn’t work. I’m referring you to my other posts in this thread, because I’m not going to lift a finger to retype a single word I’ve posted, nor re-read my own posts that you can’t spend 30 seconds looking for. Meanwhile, I know for a fact that you haven’t posted anything to substantiate your assertion that it’s a fallacy to quote economists talking about economics. ETA: what is with the thing where you can go look up and post extended quotes about Adam Smith, but you can’t read my dozen or so posts that answer this question that you find so very important that you are compelled to ask me about every few hours? ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2019, 10:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291/138 "2019-08-13T10:48:14Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > “When markets work…”, this is a economic fallacy. Yet you yourself referenced the market when discussing why my never rent controlled apartments didn’t have infinite rent. Housing markets work in this country when we allow them to. They work by incentivizing investment in housing when demand goes up. ---
**Author:** ![GreenHell](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/ea666f/32.png) [@GreenHell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreenHell)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2019, 11:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291/139 "2019-08-13T11:32:53Z")
I’m a little confused about Kobal2’s criticisms. Are you attacking free-markets or America? Because, as a student of economics and (not by choice) American, they are not at all the same thing. I am a free-market apologist, because I believe competition, innovation, and consumer choice yield the greatest good for the greatest number the greatest proportion of the time. The invisible hand of the market does work, in that respect. However, I am an apologist for the free-market, not an extremist. I think that most of the time, if a person can’t afford something, they should go without it. However, to allow people to starve, die of treatable illnesses, etc. because they are poor is atrocious. To paraphrase Smith: “We do not enjoy our beer, bread, and meat from the generosity of the brewer, baker, or butcher, but from their self interest.” However, even within the text of Wealth of Nations, he took the trouble to point out that it was not unbridled greed that made the system work, but enlightened self-interest. That first part is as important as the latter. But, this is largely theoretical. In practice, Americans are not going to allow free-market principles to compete with the established wealthy elites any more than they allow democracy to dislodge dynastic politicos or Christ-like benevolence supplant religious favoritism. Mentioning medical costs in the U.S. is the very worst way to attack Capitalism. While a quality medical system run or funded by the state could be argued to be better than free-market solutions, free-market medical care is not what the Americans have. Rather the physician shortage was intentionally installed by the AMA’s restrictions on the number of physicians trained, legacy admits ensured that more gifted lower-class students could not short-circuit the entry of less-qualified children of physicians (legacy admissions), and the spiraling costs of medical care were addressed by insurance (an industry that engages in price-fixing and gouging writ into law via regulation). If you deal with a cartel, you are going to get gouged. If you need to deal with the intersection of TWO cartels . . . I’m ethnically French as well, and I think it is long past due for the Americans to re-boot their democracy, preferably peacefully, failing that, otherwise. But, I have no faith that they will do so. Americans are too stupid. AN American can be intelligent, collectively, they have shown that there is virtually no abuse they won’t tolerate from the powerful and wealthy, because they are deluded enough to think they they will one day be at that end of the lash and malicious enough to desire it. “The slave dreams not of freedom, but of becoming the master.” ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2019, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291/140 "2019-08-13T16:09:49Z")
> [@Ruken](#): > > Yet you yourself referenced the market when discussing why my never rent controlled apartments didn’t have infinite rent. Housing markets work in this country when we allow them to. They work by incentivizing investment in housing when demand goes up. Sure, but that’s different than the "invisible hand market’ where the hypothesis is that if government would just get out of the way with it’s silly regulations,:rolleyes: the magical and mythical "invisible hand market’ would just make everything peachy keen and perfect. :dubious: [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-should-have-housing-policies-like-tokyo/838291.md?page=8)