Housing in California and Indiana
Comparing regulations, quality, and options in these two states reveals more than a bit about the state of U.S. housing
Earlier today I had an article published at Econlib, “Comparing Housing in California and Indiana,” which as the title suggests is an evaluation of the housing markets in these two states.
It’s not a comprehensive analysis, but I do think it highlights some of the key differences in pricing, regulation, and quality between these two jurisdictions.
And jurisdictions is a key word, because many of the differences between Indiana and California housing options can be attributed to different government regulations regarding housing development and land use. Make it complicated and expensive to build, as is the case in many areas of California, and people will take their development dollars and build elsewhere. States like Indiana are happy to have them.
This leaves low and average income people in states like California worse off, as they are generally priced out of the housing market and stuck as long-term renters. This excludes them from one of the key ways of generating wealth in America, the combination of homeownership and house price appreciation. It also makes it difficult for these people to enjoy the other, less tangible benefits of homeownership, like feeling secure in—and proud of—their own dwelling; relaxing in their own yard; tending to their own garden, lawn, or fruit tree.
But there is nothing unsolvable about this situation. There is no reason it cannot change for the better, in California or anywhere else anti-growth attitudes are reflected in law and policy. I think one way to spark that change is to get development-unfriendly people in a place like California to realize the undeniable human benefits of building more, which are on display in suburban Indiana as well as a number of other states and metros that have embraced responsible development.
More people make for a thicker, more diverse market with more available goods and services. This thickened market attracts immigrants from elsewhere, who bring new skills and entrepreneurial talents. Cultural blossoming most always follows, when people have the security and wealth to enjoy their leisure. Indeed, housing and land deregulation would allow people from all walks of life and especially less-well-off backgrounds to get a foot in the door in an area where things are happening and interesting, talented people live. Such a move toward opportunity is often the beginning of genuine upward mobility. And people improving their own and others’ circumstances with minimal state assistance or interference is a beautiful thing to behold.
I hope you have a chance to read the full article at Econlib. And have a happy weekend!
People can vote with their feet, and they have been leaving California for some time. California is a good starter state for undocumented immigrants, whose children will be more likely to leave with the other Americans.