@ArtemisConsort I think you need to study your Bayes. Doom is not strictly contingent on any of those things. We can still have doom if interpretability stays high for example.
@s8mb@Starcourse It’s not perfectly inelastic of course but it is the relative elasticities that matter. Demand is much more elastic than supply and I would be intuitively shocked if the split was more than 20% on the buyer in the aggregate market.
@s8mb@Starcourse I wouldn't lean on that figure. Interesting paper, but the evidence is too thin to generalise to the wider housing market - and for the result to hold you'd have to overturn either a core principle of economics or all the evidence that housing supply is inelastic.
@robinhanson I think people don’t appreciate entrusting people with the terrible volatile energies needed to escape a gravity well is never going to be a free for all.
@AaronBastani You are completely right if you ignore the time value of money, opportunity cost, capital depreciation, economic efficiency and the principal- agent problem.
@DanNeidle Also fun fact: super prime property out in the sticks might see their stamp duty decrease more than offset their land value decrease. Creates some very unsympathetic winners.
@DanNeidle Interesting, I noticed you touched on planning but didnt talk about how this would create a strong incentive to encumber your own property (and your neighbours) with planning restrictions to lower land value. A pretty nasty nash equilibrium.
@theonejvo@kamipapa2@grok You might have 12 generations of butterfly a year in a rainforest. That’s high frequency high intensity selection pressure on some patterning. Echo location and multi modal deception far more impressive.
@DanNeidle@_Unknown_D_ The economic literature is pretty clear here, it depends on the relative elasticities of supply and demand. Sainsbury’s passes it to consumers. Apple is likely taking a hit to its profits.
“Economically borne” is not a term used in economics. Do you mean “incident”?
@lawrencenewport Crime and safety issues are almost always at the root of why our urban design is so rubbish. We can have nice stuff if you punish vandals, robbers and in the case of toilets: the men who treat them as place to hookup. If you aren’t willing to do that then🤷
@thomasforth Rent control kills supply when it binds below equilibrium - SF, Stockholm, old NYC all show this. Paris's caps track median rents +20%; they don't bind. You're conflating the policy existing with it actually suppressing prices.
@thomasforth "Rent control" in that sense is not "rules that allow the government to limit rent increases" but rather, action taken that stops rents from rising above their market equilibrium.
@s8mb@xvrmdf Probably pretty negatively. You are going to have a hard time comparing like for like but I would expect over the long run with cap gains taxes you aren’t coming out much ahead. Plus volatility. “If it sounds too good…” etc…
@s8mb It’s not clear to me that you would see much benefit. You would need to know how much tax drag from US withholding they suffer. Dividend taxes get capitalized in stock drop offs also making things very tricky to model.