​NO!!!

Americans own too many vacation homes, and it's making the 'new housing crisis' worse

The author is looking for a top down socialist/progressive regulation to fix a problem which was created by too much regulation.

The problem is too much land use, zoning, and urban growth boundary. It is a supply issue, but it is being driven by the fact that our governments at the local level have tied up our land which we can easily, and cheaply use to build the housing that we want. Instead, our local governments believe we need to be told what we want, or more accurately, what we can have. And we should, like good plebs, simply accept the crumbs thrown to us. 

Reducing, or, even better, eliminating these regulations would allow us to build what we want, where we want it. This would about immediately cure the housing shortage, and bleed the excessive costs out of home ownership.

And this is the real reason it is so difficult to undo the horrific problems which progressive policies create. The current homeowners have a strong interest in marinating the current status quo. They are fully invested in the belief that their properties are worth $XXX. Eliminating the regulations would cut the price by some significant amount, let's say to $X-1/2. These homeowners cannot abide by the though that they will lose half the home value. So, the growth boundary become an immutable blight on the landscape, and prices continue to climb inexorably until they become so high that no one can afford them. Then there will come a collapse. 

"Citing data from the Census Bureau and the National Association of Realtors, Pointon said almost 1 million homes are now held vacant for "personal reasons," up from under 800,000 four years ago.

More people saw their second homes as stores of value in the low-interest-rate environment that has reduced returns from some other assets, Pointon said.

In September, Vancouver proposed up to a 2% tax on empty homes to encourage owners to rent out their properties. This hasn't been introduced in the US, but it could be on the horizon in some markets, especially if the supply crunch persists."

200,000 homes did not make this problem. Further the Vancouver problem is one of a very tight urban growth boundary, and hot money from China trying to buy into the market. If there were no growth boundary, the hot money from China would not be able to drive home prices the way it has in Vancouver. But with a growth boundary, even a little additional money will quickly drive prices upwards.

The solution is not more regulation, but less, kill the land use regulations, and return the housing market to a more normal status. For God's sake, Canada is just mile after mile of empty land, what in the world do Canadians need  a growth boundary for?

But there is little graft in lower regulations, and politicians love graft, and there is little political pressure from the existing home owners to change the lay of the land since it will cost them a very pretty penny. 

The only way out is through the collapse, or when the home owners wake up and realize that the collapse means Detroit, and what that means for their property values.