Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Brendan's avatar
1hEdited

This is broadly true and I agree we desperately need more/better housing/education/healthcare/good things, but some aspects of this scarcity are not a plot or evidence of market forces failing, but perversely result from the labor market *working* to unfortunate effect. There's a phenomenon called Baumol's Cost Disease: roughly, it explains that if some parts of the economy become more productive, it drives up costs even in unrelated sectors.

Imagine a city like San Francisco experiencing a tech boom: software is going crazy, computers are getting 100x better/faster/cheaper every few years. Anyone who is clever enough to be a high school science teacher could instead go become a web developer and triple their salary overnight. Education hasn't gotten any better or more efficient, but suddenly you have to pay more to attract and retain your teachers.

Some variation of this effect is at play in most of these sectors like healthcare or education that are not susceptible to efficiency gains and automation. The financial sector has been wildly profitable over the past four decades, and so many of the top students have flocked to finance. It costs more to hire a math teacher because so many potential math teachers are now Wall Street quants.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baumol_effect

J Knutsen's avatar

I agree with this solution.

I also remember when the government owned its buildings-like post offices. Now the post office closest to me moves every few years since they’ve been forced to rent from private owners. All this costs a whole lot more than when the government was allowed to own its buildings, which in turn gets passed on to us.

15 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?