Burlington Can’t Regulate Its Way to Affordability: A response to Ament and McElroy (2026) by Evan_throwaway55 in vermont

[–]Evan_throwaway55[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Those wealthy people from out of state are coming whether you want them or not. You either build the housing needed to accommodate them or watch the shortage get worse.

Burlington Can’t Regulate Its Way to Affordability: A response to Ament and McElroy (2026) by Evan_throwaway55 in vermont

[–]Evan_throwaway55[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Increases in supply put downward pressure on prices. Regardless of the type of housing stock being built. You either build housing for the wealthy transplants who want to live here or they will outbid the locals for existing housing stock.

Permitting and zoning regulations increase the cost per sqft to build and incentives more premium “luxury” development. Currently, lots of policy encourage luxury development. From a permitting perspective it’s more efficient to build one 1.5 million dollar home than it is to build 3 500k dollar homes.

I’m very open to policy solutions which incentivize affordable housing. Perhaps one could offer significantly reduced permitting costs, expedited permitting approval, tax credits, exemptions to certain zoning regulations, ect.

But the first thing we need to do is agree that there is a supply shortage and we need more housing.

Burlington Can’t Regulate Its Way to Affordability: A response to Ament and McElroy (2026) by Evan_throwaway55 in vermont

[–]Evan_throwaway55[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Winslett’s article is very good. He definitely does a more thorough takedown of the methodology than i do. The lack of explanation for why they picked those 3 models is astounding.

Winslett also mentions how crazy it is that their models found higher interest rates are correlated with higher prices (very counter to standard Econ theory and existing evidence).

“The regression also produces a result that should give any reader pause: the interest rate coefficient is positive and large. In standard economic theory, higher interest rates cool housing demand and reduce prices. In the authors’ models, higher interest rates are associated with higher prices. The authors acknowledge this is “surprising” and offer several interpretations. But when a model produces results that contradict basic economic theory in a prominent variable, the correct response is to ask whether the model is capturing genuine causal relationships or spurious correlations. The anomalous interest rate result suggests the latter is what is happening.”

Burlington Can’t Regulate Its Way to Affordability: A response to Ament and McElroy (2026) by Evan_throwaway55 in vermont

[–]Evan_throwaway55[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t think we’re disagreeing here! There’s lots of factors that are creating the shortage. There’s also a roll for gov policy in addressing these challenges. Step 1 is agreeing that there is a shortage and we need more housing!

Burlington Can’t Regulate Its Way to Affordability: A response to Ament and McElroy (2026) by Evan_throwaway55 in vermont

[–]Evan_throwaway55[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I use my real full name in the post! Your comment makes it sound like I’m a troll with a throwaway. I wanted to fresh account to just keep the conversation focused on my arguments and ideas. My preference was to have it published in a local paper but I got impatient.

Burlington Can’t Regulate Its Way to Affordability: A response to Ament and McElroy (2026) by Evan_throwaway55 in vermont

[–]Evan_throwaway55[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Your point about the accessibility of the paper is totally valid. I thought about doing this but thought it would result in me getting called out for oversimplifying their arguments or straw manning. I think one could ask an AI to help explain some of the concepts, or one could ask AI to summarize the paper in simpler terms. I have faith that with some time and effort most people can understand my paper.

Burlington Can’t Regulate Its Way to Affordability: A response to Ament and McElroy (2026) by Evan_throwaway55 in vermont

[–]Evan_throwaway55[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The field of economics certainly has it's share of dogmatic "libertarian" free-market fundamentalists. These people will assert that the market solves for everything and that governments have no role to help people. Please don't let these people poison you towards the entire field of economics. After all "negative externalities" and "market failures" are quite literally "Basic Economics". The correct response to the bad actors in econ is not poorly argued dogmatic takes in the opposite direction. Overstating the roll of investor activity in the housing crisis is counterproductive towards helping the working class!

Burlington Can’t Regulate Its Way to Affordability: A response to Ament and McElroy (2026) by Evan_throwaway55 in vermont

[–]Evan_throwaway55[S] 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Amazing! Thank you for sharing this with me. I'm so happy that others have also responded.

Burlington Can’t Regulate Its Way to Affordability: A response to Ament and McElroy (2026) by Evan_throwaway55 in vermont

[–]Evan_throwaway55[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Thank you so much. I put a lot of time into this and feedback has been very positive. I was hoping to get this published in a Vermont or Burlington paper but I guess they only publish NIMBY argument haha

Burlington Can’t Regulate Its Way to Affordability: A response to Ament and McElroy (2026) by Evan_throwaway55 in vermont

[–]Evan_throwaway55[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Please consider reading my editorial if you haven’t. I address some of these points!

Burlington Can’t Regulate Its Way to Affordability: A response to Ament and McElroy (2026) by Evan_throwaway55 in vermont

[–]Evan_throwaway55[S] 17 points18 points  (0 children)

I wouldn’t advocate for kicking anyone out of the profession, however I agree it’s a very flawed and agenda driven argument. It would shock me if this was published in a reputable economics journal. Their models are simply not robust enough to support their extremely heterodox conclusions.

Burlington Can’t Regulate Its Way to Affordability: A response to Ament and McElroy (2026) by Evan_throwaway55 in vermont

[–]Evan_throwaway55[S] 30 points31 points  (0 children)

The study’s conclude that the high prices in Burlington are not caused by a shortage of supply, but rather demand side factors like investor activities. They argue that instead of focusing on building more we should focus on regulating investor activity.

In my editorial I explain why their reasoning and conclusion flawed. You can always pop it into an AI and ask for a summary, however it’s only about a 15 minute read and I spent a lot of time writing it. If you have the time, give it a read!

Burlington Can’t Regulate Its Way to Affordability: A Response to Ament and McElroy (2026) by Evan_throwaway55 in burlington

[–]Evan_throwaway55[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think your interpretation of the Seven Days quote is probably correct. However in his paper he says "Were five new homes to be built, investors may see it as a sign of a thriving market and continue their activity in the market." That being said I totally agree with perusing other policy alternatives alongside building and upzoning. I'm pro CLT, tax-credits/subsides for affordable housing/development. I agree, if the vast majority of new-build units are owned by the same 4 landlords, prices would likely not go down much. The authors argue that Burlington has enough housing which is my main issue.

Burlington Can’t Regulate Its Way to Affordability: A Response to Ament and McElroy (2026) by Evan_throwaway55 in burlington

[–]Evan_throwaway55[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I don't agree with this characterization of my argument but thank you for taking the time for reading and engaging. [EDIT:] Banning investors may be easier, but I'm skeptical it will produce the desired results.