travis bickle: I'm not suggesting that government doesn't add to the cost of the home, but I am very doubtful of econgrad's claim that these fees would nearly triple housing costs (in this example, a $250K loft that Econgrad assesses as worth $90K.) I just think he is overestimating the cost of city fees by a ludicrous degree, and discounting consumer demand entirely.
Quote:
|
Why do existing homes cost as much as new homes despite not having to pay government fees? C'mon wburg... you know the answer to that. The fees drive the costs for the entire market, not the other way around.
|
But then, why do buildings outside the central city neighborhoods cost less? If it is entirely the fees, rather than consumer demand, shouldn't a home in Del Paso Heights or Oak Park cost the same as a house of similar square footage in Midtown or Land Park? And yes, I know the answer to that: people are quite simply willing to pay more for property in Midtown or Land Park than in Del Paso or Oak Park, because the location is more desirable. Econgrad's second fallacy is that he doesn't seem to think that location matters in real estate. I am certain you know better than that, Travis.