But hey, money is more important than anything and nothing should constrain the markets, eh?
Politicians don’t care, people with houses don’t care, the rich don’t care.
We’ve made a future in which there’s no social contract, where young people have nothing and no home and no prospect of ever owning a home.
By this measure, capitalism has failed entirely to serve the people.
There will be consequences.
What regulation is being captured?
I've noticed this on HN. Anytime thr market produces a negative result for society, rather than acknowledge it, it gets blamed on some imaginary regulatory capture. Like there there is an ability to accept that markets produce negative results for society - it's always blamed on some external force.
Like, what are the odds some local 'boomer NIMBYs' or whoever the scapegoat is succeed about everywhere.
That's not mutually exclusive with regulatory capture. The problem of excessively large motor vehicles in the US is contributed to by both deliberate quirks of the tax system and a zero sum bidding war to be the biggest on the road, for example.
If these people were smart, they'd realize that rising house values don't help them, because 1) they can't make money on a house they're still living in, they have to sell it first, and then where are they going to move to? and 2) rising house values means rising tax assessments which means their mortgage bill will increase to pay the higher property taxes.
The underlying problem is that city councils ban the construction of most new homes. This has led to a supply shortage. The wealthier among us are thus forced to bid up the price of cheaper, older homes. Landlords can charge more for existing properties too. We need to change the laws so that we build lots more homes.
I do. agree strongly with your point about the loss of a social contract. If you’re interested in helping fix this problem, join the YIMBY movement.