Read on Twitter
If you think:
1. People should be allowed to build their own houses if they like...
1. People should be allowed to build their own houses if they like...
2. People who would rather pay someone else to build a house to save time and money should be able to do so
3. Situations shouldn't be allowed to arise where the cost of housing grossly increases (or increases at all) at the expense of those who don't own housing
Then you may believe in reducing restrictions on supply and even, gasp, market dogma
If you
A. Believe that those that still can't afford a house should have benefits increased an access to social housing
A. Believe that those that still can't afford a house should have benefits increased an access to social housing
And B: That those people should be able to move house when the need arises.
But C: That house prices should still not massively increase
You may actually think housing is a commodity (something that is bought and sold).
If you think colonial heritage shouldn't be more than a negligible factor in housing, you may just believe in reducing restrictions on supply
Economics, and markets (generally), are not your enemy. Those that misuse them while claiming to stand for them are (see people claiming house price rises are good for the economy; most anything produced by the Taxpayers' Union; etc).
The concerns others raise about social housing, and the awfulness of colonial heritage, astronomical price rises that transfer wealth from the poor to the rich, and many other things are accounted for in market economics.
The constraint on effectively fixing all these issues is supply, tho. The are problems, but they almost entirely symptoms of the supply problem.
Dismissing supply and market solutions because of 'market dogma' hands those that would misuse economics an out. They get to point and say 'see, even this person thinks fixing supply isn't going to solve the problem'.
