The Housing Crisis in the United States

By Riley N. Keelty and Walter E. Block

Riley N. Keelty is a senior at Loyola University in New Orleans, Louisiana.

Walter E. Block is the Harold E. Wirth Eminent Scholar Endowed Chair and Professor of Economics at Loyola University New Orleans.

The housing crisis has become a significant problem in the United States, with millions of Americans struggling to find stable and affordable housing because of the increasing prices of homes and rents stemming from a chronic shortage of housing, high costs of land and construction, restrictive zoning laws, rent control, and public housing. Joseph Gyourko & Raven Molloy, Regulation and Housing Supply, in 5 Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, at 1289 (Gilles Duranton et al. eds., 2015), https://tinyurl.com/4587uba3. Consequently, the housing market does not provide adequate housing for lowand middle-income families, resulting in housing insecurity and financial burdens for many. In addition, the specter of homelessness haunts many of our large-size cities. Some commentators point to what they see as a dilemma in maximizing the economic gains from limited state intervention and applying selective policies to ease affordability constraints while maintaining the spirit of competition and personal responsibility. This article does not take that approach; instead, the solution lies in the free market direction of rescinding these public policies. A historical background of this chronic housing problem, its consequences, and policy discourses in the United States is followed by sections that feature analysis of zoning and then discussions pertaining to rent control, urban renewal, and public housing. The COVID-19 pandemic compounded the crisis. It brought new challenges and amplified trends already affecting the housing market. The pandemic affected the availability of building materials, which increased the cost of construction and halted the progress of ongoing construction projects. Lack of raw materials such as lumber and high labor costs led to high prices charged to customers and tenants. The pandemic, therefore, amplified existing problems within the housing market and exposed the inability of the current system to adapt to shifts in demand. Short shrift is given to this obvious cause of housing debilities because (1) it is so obvious and (2) there is certainly nothing that can be done about it now in terms of housing public policy.

Historical Background of the Housing Crisis

The current housing crisis in America dates back to the post–World War II economic frameworks and urban planning strategies that defined residential markets. After the war, the government actively encouraged suburbanization, subsidizing homeownership through federal programs offering low-interest mortgage loans to veterans and middle-income families. David Madden & Peter Marcuse, In Defense of Housing: The Politics of Crisis (2024). This desire for suburbanization also led to a cultural and economic focus on single-family homes, often backed by zoning laws that prohibited the construction of multifamily buildings, thus reducing the density of cities and limiting housing options. These zoning policies persisted in the subsequent decades, further deepening housing misallocations that exist to this day.

The housing crisis escalated during the housing boom and bust of the late 2000s when high foreclosure rates and a decline in homeownership occurred. Manuel B. Aalbers, Financial Geography III: The Financialization of the City, 44 Progress in Hum. Geography 595 (2020), https://tinyurl.com/2xyf5vj2. After the 2008 financial crisis, the affordability and accessibility of housing never returned to previous levels for these groups, as wages stagnated and home prices rose even higher. Id. This historical background is crucial in explaining the structural problems and imperfections that persist in fueling the housing crisis in the present day.

The housing crisis in the United States has affected significantly the affordability of homes, with young people and first-time homeowners being most affected. With home prices soaring high while wages remain stagnant, the prospect of homeownership has remained a pipe dream for the younger generations, particularly the Millennials and Gen Z. These people have higher hurdles to overcome to become homeowners because of student loans, high rents, and low incomes, which makes it challenging for them to save for a down payment or meet the requirements for a mortgage. Id. Higher housing costs prolong the dream of owning a home and affect the economy as young people find it more difficult to invest in assets, save, or be financially stable. This inability to buy homes limits their economic opportunities and decreases their lifetime earnings, entrenching generational poverty. With the housing crisis ongoing, the divide between homeowners and renters deepens, leading to increased vulnerability of the youth in the face of economic shocks. The crisis has significantly affected homelessness.

There has been a continuous decline in the rate of new housing construction, which has led to a sizable supply demand imbalance in the market. Construction rates that had started to decline after the 2008 financial crisis did not return to normal, and recent hikes have made it even harder to construct new homes. Land, labor, and material costs also have increased, while lengthy and expensive permitting procedures have limited the construction of exceptionally affordable housing. Gyourko & Molloy, supra. These regulatory barriers cumulatively raise costs for new construction, which are transferred to consumers and tenants, thus exacerbating the affordable housing crisis for middle- and lower-income households. Although the free market can achieve supply and demand equilibrium, this becomes more difficult when policies and other hindrances prevent developers from addressing housing deficits, thus deepening the problem.

Effect on Mental Health and Physical Well-being of Americans

Housing insecurity also takes a toll on mental and physical well-being, as constant stress from unsure living conditions results in higher incidences of anxiety and stress-related diseases among households. Research also suggests that housing-insecure people are vulnerable to mental health disorders and chronic stress diseases like hypertension and heart disease. Tom Slater, Rent Control and Housing Justice, 55 Finisterra, no. 114, 2020, at 59, https://tinyurl. com/5y52wtnk. Children in poor households constantly change schools often because of rent issues, which hampers their early development. Further, such persons at risk of eviction or homelessness are also more at risk of substance use and other risky behaviors, as well as coping strategies that threaten their health and financial stability. Id. These health points more inclusively show additional socioeconomic costs of housing insecurity, as these effects worsen overall wellness as costs of the healthcare industry and diminish general productivity, making negative circles in the economy. For the connection between zoning and health, see the following: Lauren M. Rossen & Keshia M. Pollack, Making the Connection Between Zoning and Health Disparities, 5 Env’t Just. Rev. 119 (2012), https://tinyurl.com/mncjbsne; Kenneth A. De Ville & Suzanne Sparrow, Public Health Law: Zoning, Urban Planning, and the Public Health Practitioner, 14 J. Pub. Health Mgmt. & Prac. 313 (2008); Lant Pritchett & Lawrence H. Summers, Wealthier Is Healthier, 31 J. Hum. Res. 841 (1996); and Joseph Schilling & Leslie S. Linton, The Public Health Roots of Zoning: In Search of Active Living’s Legal Genealogy, 28 Am. J. of Preventive Med. (Suppl. 2) 96 (2005), https://tinyurl.com/2w98kvb4.

Effect on the Economic Mobility and Living Standards

The housing problem also contributes to the lack of improved economic status among families trapped in high-rent, low-quality buildings. When house rents take a significant part of the family’s income, there is less that a family can spend on education, training, or creating jobs for themselves and others, which are some pathways to economic mobility. Marcuse & Madden, supra. Inadequate or limited ability to afford homes in good school districts and well-lit areas containing employment opportunities confines low-earning families to substandard areas, creates vicious cycles of poverty, and reduces the chances of children’s education and employment. Id

Zoning Restrictions

The zoning ordinances put in place to regulate the construction of housing units in different areas have significantly fueled the crisis further. Most urban areas have laws restricting housing density and development, especially for multi-unit structures, rendering land costs higher than otherwise would have been the case. Jake Wegmann, Death to Single-Family Zoning . . . and New Life to the Missing Middle, 86 J. Am. Planning Ass’n 113 (2020), https://tinyurl. com/3n3jjv2r. These laws protect neighborhoods and property values, limit the supply of affordable housing, and curb the construction of apartments and other multifamily dwellings. In cities such as San Francisco and New York, which are experiencing extremely high housing demand, these restrictions have put in place narrow constraints that do not allow the market to expand and accommodate the greater demand. Zoning laws restrict the ability to build more housing units and result in urban sprawl, meaning affordable homes constructed further away from employment centers, leading to problems such as lengthy transportation. For a critique of zoning, see the following: Dave Albin, Historic Preservation vs. Private-Property Rights, Mises Inst. (2010), https:// tinyurl.com/p29p9pt9; Bruce L. Benson, Land Use Regulation: A Supply and Demand Analysis of Changing Property Rights, 5 J. Libertarian Stud. 435 (1981), https://tinyurl.com/yw2h6p4x; Zoning: Its Costs and Relevance for the 1980s (Walter E. Block ed., 1980); Walter E. Block, Zoning and the Free Market, YouTube (Jan. 29, 1981), https://tinyurl.com/yjwze8s4; Walter E. Block, Private Urban Planning and Free Enterprise, in Cities and Private Planning: Property Rights, Entrepreneurship and Transactions Costs (David E. Andersson & Stefano Moroni eds., 2014), https://tinyurl.com/bdz9jnwy; Troy Camplin, Zoning Laws Destroy Communities, Mises Daily (Apr. 30, 2010), https://tinyurl.com/yuupd3x7; Jim Fedako, Zoning Is Theft, Mises Daily (Mar. 21, 2006), https://tinyurl.com/bdmfv59n; Jim Fedako, Government Laws Are Not Contracts, Mises Daily (May 30, 2019), https://tinyurl.com/2buxkyvu; Lee Friday, The Scam That Is Urban “Land Use” Planning, Mises Wire (Feb. 7, 2018), https://tinyurl.com/yfrbc2eu; Lee Friday, City Governments Don’t Care About Housing Affordability, Mises Wire (Oct. 23, 2018), https://tinyurl.com/ mr3mwh73; Frank Hollenbeck, To Save Europe, Free the Markets, Mises Daily (Oct. 19, 2013), https://tinyurl.com/yke6tfxa; Jacob G. Hornberger, The Cure for Homelessness, Mises Wire (Sept. 15, 2018), https://tinyurl.com/bddv3e6n; Douglas W. Kmiec, Deregulating Land Use: An Alternative Free Enterprise Development System, 130 U. Pa. L. Rev. 28 (1981), https://tinyurl.com/3n3wbwkh; Ryan McMaken, Homelessness and the Failure of Urban Renewal, Mises Wire (May 4, 2017), https://tinyurl.com/yzy96uas; Ash Navabi, The Economics and Politics of Zoning, Mises Wire (Nov. 4, 2019), https://tinyurl.com/mr9m8x58; José Niño, Seattle Declares War on Workers with Wage and Housing Regulations, Mises Wire (June 6, 2018), https://tinyurl. com/7m3wc55t; Ben O’Neill, How Zoning Rules Would Work in a Free Society, Mises Daily (June 17, 2009), https:// tinyurl.com/2rnu97dm; Bernard H. Siegan, Non-zoning in Houston, 13 J. L. & Econ. 71 (1970); Bernard H. Siegan, Land Use Without Zoning (1972); Timothy D. Terrell, Simulating Statism, 18 The Free Mkt., no. 3 (Mar. 2000).

Relaxing Zoning Restrictions

A possible solution to address the lack of housing stock is the relaxation of zoning rules and limitations on land use. Cities also could increase the number of affordable units by removing zoning restrictions that prevent higher-density development, such as multifamily housing. Gyourko & Molloy, supra. For example, some cities have been able to adopt measures that permit the construction of ADUs or the conversion of underused business areas into residential units, thus increasing the population density without changing the nature of the community. Zoning reform remains a sensitive issue because many communities oppose high-density development because of traffic congestion, pressure on public facilities, and changes to the physical character of neighborhoods. Removing zoning hurdles might help increase the housing stock. One possibility is to gradually increase the density of zoning laws to improve the availability and affordability of housing without such a severe effect on the market as rent control. Given that this policy is unjust as well as inequitable and reduces the housing stock, if one had the power to eliminate this law and did not do so, one would bear some of the guilt for its continuation.

A successful example of the deregulation of zoning laws happened in Minneapolis, where, in 2018, the city council passed an ordinance to do away with single-family zoning and allow triplexes in residential zones. Wegmann, supra. Minneapolis politicians understood that exclusionary zoning policies contributed to the housing shortage by making it difficult to build affordable housing in high-demand neighborhoods. The city allowed the construction of more high-density housing to provide more housing units. Id. The policy change was to permit property owners to develop multi-housing structures in regions once reserved for single-family dwellings, resulting in increased housing stock and more affordable options in the most sought-after neighborhoods. Although the effects of this policy are still emerging, some people have applauded it as one that will open the doors to providing houses, especially in cities struggling with housing problems, such as Minneapolis. Nonetheless, several issues persist, such as slow implementations and impediments arising out of residents’ concerns over the transformation of neighborhood aesthetics.

Rent Control

Rent control is one of the most discussed measures to help fight the housing crisis. It is aimed at preventing rent hikes by defining the legal maximum values of the increase. Advocates suggest that rent control can create an instant backup for residents who paid extreme sums for a house in a famous region and now risk losing their savings and home to a well funded investor. Slater, supra. Detractors claim this legislation comes with detriments because it deters landlords and property developers from taking care of their property and making improvements because of the cut-down profits that come with rent control legislation. If owners cannot increase rent to market levels, they will cut back on the quality of building maintenance, thereby contributing to the decline in housing quality. Id For instance, Argentina’s elimination of rent controls is a clear illustration of this. See the case study below. Although the policy effectively prevented further hikes in rent charges, it resulted in a scarcity of houses in the market as landlords withdrew their properties. Although rent control may offer some short-term benefits regarding rent affordability, the long-term economic effects indicate that other strategies can more effectively address housing requirements.

Effect on Renters

The consequences for renters are also significant, as landlords have increased rental prices, making housing unstable and leading families to spend a higher percentage of their income on rent. Because of higher rental prices than income growth, millions of Americans have rent burdens, which means they spend over 30% of their income on rent. Bradley, supra. Because of high rental costs, tenants are likely to experience housing insecurity because they may have to relocate in search of cheaper homes or risk eviction if they cannot pay their rent. These challenges, especially for low-income renters, perpetuate the cycle of poverty and leave little hope of building any savings or making longterm investments. Id. The housing crisis has led to the situation where renters, especially in urban areas, are forced to spend a significantly higher proportion of their income on housing to the detriment of other basic needs such as health, education, and transportation, thus making them more prone to financial risks.

How is it possible for these deleterious effects to take place? Does not rent control preclude them? Well, yes, for those covered by this law, at least temporarily, until the quality of the housing covered falls to the level allowed by the law. But the best way of looking at this legislation is to ask: Does this law increase or decrease the stock of housing? Obviously, the latter. For the investor, in effect, is told that if you place your hard-earned savings in this one area, you will be subject to controls. If you invest anywhere else in the economy, this will not occur. Even if such a person is fixated on the real estate area, there are other options—for instance, shopping malls, factories, or office buildings. None of them has ever been subjected to rent controls. Hence, investment funds will migrate from residential housing, for which there is a dire need, and percolate into these other areas of real estate and, further, into any and all other corners of the economy. Paradoxically, the best way to promote investment in residential housing would be to price control every other good and service in the economy, except for this one area. According to Lindbeck, “In many cases, rent control appears to be the most efficient technique presently known to destroy a city except for bombing.” Assar Lindbeck, The Political Economy of the New Left (1972) (cited in Sven Rydenfelt, The Rise, Fall and Revival of Swedish Rent Control, in Rent Control: Myths and Realities at 213, 230 (Walter E. Block & Edgar Olsen eds., 1981). In the view of Myrdal, “Rent control has in certain western countries constituted, maybe, the worst example of poor planning by governments lacking courage and vision.” Gunnar Myrdal, Opening Address to the Council of International Building Research in Copenhagen (1965) (cited in Block & Olsen, supra, Preface). For more in this vein, see the following: Charles Baird, Rent Control: Ther Perennial Folly (1980); Block & Olsen, supra; Walter E. Block, Joseph Horton & Ethan Shorter, Rent Control: An Economic Abomination, 11 Int’l J. Value-Based Mgmt. 253 (1998); Walter E. Block, A Critique of the Legal and Philosophical Case for Rent Control, 40 J. Bus. Ethics 75 (2002), https:// tinyurl.com/4j3sk8my; Walter E. Block, Harold E. Wirth & Joseph A. Butt, The Case for Punishing Those Responsible for Minimum Wage Laws, Rent Control and Protectionist Tariffs, 18 Revista Jurídica Cesumar—Mestrado 235 (2018), https:// tinyurl.com/yf9zprz6; Milton Friedman & George Stigler, Roofs or Ceilings? (1946), reprinted in Block & Olsen, supra; Gary Galles, Rent Control Makes for Good Politics and Bad Economics, Mises Wire (Apr. 10, 2017), https://tinyurl. com/9s34fmkk; William D. Grampp, Some Effects of Rent Control, 16 S. Econ. J. 425 (1950); R.W. Grant, Rent Control and the War Against the Poor: Ideology, the Poor and the Role of Political Force (1989); Friedrich A. Hayek, The Repercussions of Rent Restrictions, in Block & Olsen, supra; Resolving the Housing Crisis: Government Policy, Decontrol, and the Public Interest (M. Bruce Johnson ed., 1982); Lindbeck, supra; Myrdal, supra; Victoria Perrie & Walter E. Block, Rent Control and Public Housing, 24 Pol. Dialogues: J. of Pol. Theory 49 (2018), https://tinyurl.com/ yk6erbtx; Peter D. Salins, The Ecology of Housing Destruction: Economic Effects of Public Intervention in the Housing Market (1980); William Tucker, The Excluded Americans: Homelessness and Housing Policies (1990).

Case Study

Argentina’s experience with the deregulation of rent control is one of the most critical and stirringly discussed cases in the context of housing policy regulation, and it is still one of the crucial lessons to the countries inclined to implement rent control measures. Argentina instituted severe rent restraints in the early 2000s because of high rents in its major cities like Buenos Aires. Alejandro D. Jacobo & Konstantin A. Kholodilin, One Hundred Years of Rent Control in Argentina: Much Ado About Nothing, 37 J. Hous. & Build Env’t 1923 (2022). At first, rent control appeared to help tenants, especially in famous districts where rent increased and became unbearable for low and middle-income earners. As time progressed, rent control had many adverse effects, including reducing the number of houses left out for rent. Id. Tenants wanted fixed rents that did not reflect the inflation levels; hence, landlords felt no incentive to offer value for lettable space. They withdrew their buildings from the market or provided a worn image of their properties. These problems prompted Argentina to remove rent control in 2020, which shows that although rent control may provide short-term benefits, the long-term effects are harmful and can hinder the market’s ability to improve affordability and quality in the housing sector.

Urban Renewal and Public Housing

For a critique of urban renewal policy, see the following: Walter E. Block, Defending the Slumlord, LewRockwell. com (Aug. 12, 2010), https://tinyurl. com/2u2kutvn; Brent Cebul, Tearing Down Black America, Bos. Rev. (July 22, 2020), https://tinyurl.com/mpecsyyt; Ron Daniels, Gentrification: The New “Negro Removal” Program, IBW21. org (Nov. 26, 2018), https://tinyurl.com/ hvyfjj8a; Herbert J. Gans, The Failure of Urban Renewal, Commentary (Apr. 1965), https://tinyurl.com/3k89b9fs; Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities (1961); Jane Jacobs, The Economy of Cities (1970); Jane Jacobs, Cities and the Wealth of Nations: Principles of Economic Life (1985); Ryan McMaken, Homelessness and the Failure of Urban Renewal, Mises Wire (June 14, 2019), https://tinyurl.com/y9nuvmur; Michael Rikon, Urban Renewal, an Assault on Black Neighborhoods, N.Y. L.J. (Feb. 24, 2023), https://tinyurl.com/4y24f75b.

For a criticism of public housing, see the following: William L. Anderson, The Dangers of Smart Growth, Mises Daily (May 28, 2000), https://tinyurl. com/2h6n9b8t; Iron Lady’s Right to Buy and Economic Policies Had Far-Reaching Impact; Social Landlords Reflect on Thatcher’s Legacy, Inside Hous., Apr. 12, 2013; Andrew Gamble, Privatization, Thatcherism, and the British State, 16 J. L. & Soc’y 1 (1988), https://tinyurl.com/2uym4882; Kevin Gulliver, Thatcher’s Legacy: Her Role in Today’s Housing Crisis, The Guardian (Apr. 17, 2013), https://tinyurl. com/2t7nebbr; Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Of Common, Public, and Private Property and the Rationale for Total Privatization,

3 Libertarian Papers, no. 2 (2011); Jacobs, The Death of Life, supra; Jacobs, The Economy of Cities, supra; Jacobs, Cities and the Wealth of Nations, supra; David Marsh, Privatization Under Mrs. Thatcher: A Review of the Literature, 69 Pub. Admin. 459 (1991), https://tinyurl. com/y5x74st9; Brian Milligan, Right-toBuy: Margaret Thatcher’s Controversial Gift, BBC News (Apr. 10, 2013), https:// tinyurl.com/yc63ervh; Perrie & Block, supra; Joel Wolfe, State Power and Ideology in Britain: Mrs Thatcher’s Privatization Programme, 39 Pol. Stud. 237 (1991), https://tinyurl.com/4w38nakr. In 1965, Herbert Gans stated:

Suppose that the government decided that jalopies were a menace to public safety and a blight on the beauty of our highways, and therefore took them away from their drivers. Suppose, then, that to replenish the supply of automobiles, it gave these drivers a hundred dollars each to buy a good used car and also made special grants to General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler to lower the cost—although not necessarily the price—of Cadillacs, Lincolns, and Imperials by a few hundred dollars. Absurd as this may sound, change the jalopies to slum housing, and I have described, with only slight poetic license, the first fifteen years of a federal program called urban renewal.

Gans, supra.

No truer words have ever been said about this misbegotten program than these. The aesthetic sensibilities of the powers that be were offended by the existence of tenement housing, so they knocked them down! What of the people who were living there? According to one commentator: “Urban renewal programs fell disproportionately on African American communities, leading to the slogan ‘Urban renewal is Negro removal.’ The short-term consequences were dire, including loss of money, loss of social organization, and psychological trauma.” Mindy Thompson Fullilove, Root Shock: The Consequences of African American Dispossession, 78 J. Urb. Health 72 (2001), https://tinyurl.com/yxfezxs8/.

“Twas public housing for the likes of them.” But these have been properly characterized as “vertical slums.” Perhaps the best evidence for this claim is the Pruitt-Igoe housing project. Jacob Barker, McKee Buys Pruitt-Igoe Site, a Symbol of St. Louis’s Decline, and now, Rebirth, St. Louis Post-Dispatch (Aug. 14, 2016), https:// tinyurl.com/he8nhru6; Luke Fiederer, AD Classics: Pruitt-Igoe Housing Project/ Minoru Yamasaki, ArchDaily (May 15, 2017), https://tinyurl.com/bddwejpn; Collin Marshall, Pruitt-Igoe: The Troubled High-Rise That Came to Define Urban America, The Guardian (Apr. 22, 2015), https://tinyurl.com/2u68nc98; Rowan Moore, Pruitt-Igoe: Death of the American Urban Dream, The Guardian (Feb. 26, 2012), https://tinyurl.com/2u5hckpe; Nena Perry-Brown, Why Privatization Became the Fashionable Solution to Public Housing, St. Sense Media (Aug. 28, 2020), https://tinyurl.com/yc46xbem.This was a gigantic government-built vertical slum, housing not hundreds of people, but thousands. Virtually all of them were first rendered homeless by urban renewal. It was so bad that the government had to dynamite the entire project, leading to homelessness a second time around for these heavily put-upon people.

Not only does public housing of this sort reduce the stock of housing, but when it has to be destroyed, the destruction alone exacerbates homelessness and raises the price of housing. Even when such public housing is more stable, it misallocates resources. For example, consider the island of Manhattan. It is the major part, the crown, of a world-class city. It is the Maserati or Rolls Royce of real estate. In an economy predicated upon maximizing wealth, only highly productive people would live there, of the ilk that could afford such luxury automobiles. Yet, perched on the lower east side of that borough are thousands of poor people living in the projects, alongside the East River. That means that highly productive people have to commute to a greater extent than if they occupied those neighborhoods. This is a waste of resources.

How to rectify such a situation? Why, privatization, of course. For the general case on behalf of privatization, see the following: The Privatization Process: A Worldwide Perspective (Terry L. Anderson & Peter J. Hill eds., 1996); Walter E. Block, Radical Privatization and Other Libertarian Conundrums, 2 Int’l J. Pol. & Ethics 165 (2002), https://tinyurl. com/4m4rdyfa; Walter E. Block, The Privatization of Roads and Highways: Human and Economic Factors (2009); Walter E. Block & Peter Lothian Nelson, Water Capitalism: The Case for Privatizing Oceans, Rivers, Lakes, and Aquifers (2015); The Mechanics of Privatization (Eamonn Butler ed., 1988); Laurent Carnis, The Case for Road Privatization: A Defense by Restitution, 13 J. des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines 95 (2003); Richard Ebeling, Why Not Privatize Foreign Policy?, EPICTiMES (Sept. 5, 2013), https:// tinyurl.com/3bpnemm7; Privatization and Development (Steve H. Hanke ed., 1987); Steve H. Hanke, Privatization, in 3 The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics (J. Eatwell et al. eds., 1987); Rögnvaldur Hannesson, The Privatization of the Oceans, in Evolving Property Rights in Marine Fisheries (D.R. Leal ed., 2004); Rögnvaldur Hannesson, The Privatization of the Oceans (2006); Hoppe, supra; Jonathan M. Karpoff, Public versus Private Initiative in Arctic Exploration: The Effects of Incentives and Organizational Structure, 109 J. Pol. Econ. 38 (2001); William L. Megginson & Jeffry M. Netter, From State to Market: A Survey of Empirical Studies on Privatization, 39 J. Econ. Literature 321 (2001); Stephen Moore, Privatizing the U.S. Postal Service, in Privatization (Stephen Moore & Stuart Butler eds., 1987); Privatization (Stephen Moore & Stuart Butler eds., 1987); Amy Motichek, Walter E. Block & Jay Johnson, Forget Ocean Front Property, We Want Ocean Real Estate!, 11 Ethics, Place & Env’t 147 (2008), https://tinyurl.com/2bt6wtxf; Peter Lothian Nelson & Walter E. Block, Space Capitalism: The Case for Privatizing Space Travel and Colonization (2018); T.M. Ohashi, Privatization, Theory and Practice: Distributing Shares in Private and Public Enterprise (1980); T.M. Ohashi et al., Privation Theory & Practice (1980); Madson Pirie, Privatization in Theory and Practice, Adam Smith Inst. (1986), https://tinyurl.com/nu5uxtmu; E.S. Savas, Privatization (1987); Privatization: Tactics and Techniques (Michael A. Walker ed., 1988); Lawrence H. White, Privatization of Municipally-Provided Services, 2 J. Libertarian Stud. 187 (1978). One way to do so, channeling Margaret Thatcher’s actual practice, would be to sell those apartments as condominiums to their present occupants, for example, at, say, $10 each (this is very valuable real estate we are talking about here). Duxbury, supra; Gamble, supra; Gulliver, supra. Then, allow market forces to work. Soon, the present occupants will be bought out at princely sums, and those with lower productivity will relocate to the other four boroughs, or to the counties surrounding New York City. Both buyers and sellers will necessarily gain, ex ante. The only losers will be the local taxpayers.

Conclusion

We do not say that elimination of the terrible trio of zoning, rent control, and public housing will eliminate all housing problems. But rescinding these policies will go a long way in the direction of reducing homelessness, and aid and abet the middle classes in terms of housing availability.

The housing affordability crisis in the United States is a pressing concern that stems from historical experiences, supply-side constraints, and changes in economic realities in the housing market. High construction costs, regulations, investors who own income-producing property, and policy mistakes are all factors that have contributed to housing deficits, especially in the most desirable regions. These situations imply that the prospects of homeownership and rental for young people and even lowincome families continue to diminish as prices and rents escalate. They are not just about affordability; these situations affect mental health, mobility, and social inclusion, making a lasting social influence. Housing challenges must address regulatory and incentive mechanisms in a rational manner that would entail reviewing the regulatory environment and the market mechanisms to ensure housing availability. Recommendations such as relaxation of zoning restrictions, ending rent control, urban renewal, and public housing can expand housing stock while avoiding structural changes. The findings derived from the analysis of the cases considered herein suggest the need for well-planned and sustainable long-term policies, namely free enterprise, which aims at making housing more affordable and sustainable.