Kotkin would steer California's housing efforts away from high-density projects
Analyzing the article
LA Times
Our Analysis: 3 Fallacies
The Palisades and Eaton fires represent thousands of personal tragedies, but they also constitute a collective disaster, adding new housing shortages to California's already massive shortfall -- a catastrophe that stems not from acts of nature but from human policy blunders. Gov. Gavin Newsom bought a new $9-million house in November, but too many of his fellow Californians may never own a home or find an affordable rental.
Joel Kotkin correctly identifies legitimate concerns about housing affordability, construction costs, and consumer preferences in California, calling for more housing options and streamlined permitting processes. His presentation of market-driven suburban development as a possible solution has merit, but relies on the popularity of singe-family homes regardless of whether other solutions are more cost-effective.
1. red herring • Early in the article, the author introduces Newsom's personal housing purchase, which distracts from the actual policy discussion.
"Gov. Gavin Newsom bought a new $9-million house in November...
This has no bearing on the validity of housing policies. The purpose appears to be to create an emotional response or distraction rather than to counter any particular argument.
2. false dilemma • The author presents a false dichotomy by suggesting that the only options for addressing the housing crisis are either subsidizing public housing or pursuing market-driven solutions.
Instead of laws all but mandating high-density units, usually rentals, in the state's biggest metros, Sacramento needs to encourage market-driven projects
Here are some other alternative possibilities that the author overlooks:
- Reforming zoning regulations: This could involve relaxing restrictions on building density in certain areas, allowing for more diverse housing options and potentially lowering construction costs.
- Investing in affordable housing development: This could involve providing financial incentives or subsidies to developers who build affordable housing units, or creating public-private partnerships to fund affordable housing projects.
- Addressing the root causes of housing affordability: This could involve tackling issues like income inequality, high property taxes, and the cost of land.
- Promoting mixed-income housing: This could involve creating communities where people of different income levels live together, fostering a sense of community and reducing segregation.
- Encouraging innovative housing solutions: This could involve exploring new technologies and design approaches to create more affordable and sustainable housing options.
By presenting a limited range of options, the author simplifies a complex issue and limits the potential for finding effective solutions.
3. bandwagon • The author uses the popularity of single-family residences as evidence that they are the best solution to the housing crisis, even though this preference may be based on factors other than practicality or affordability.
A recent Public Policy Institute of California survey found that 70% of the state's adults preferred single-family residences.
Because an idea is popular among Californians does not automatically mean it is the best solution.
References
- Joel Kotkin (2025, Feb 18). California's housing problems require a better solution than densify, densify, densify.
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2025-02-18/california-housing-yimby-infill
Disclaimer
Note that there being one or more apparent fallacies in the arguments presented in this article does not mean that every argument the arguer made was fallacious, nor does it mean there are not other arguments in existence for the same or similar position that are logically valid. Also note that checking for fallacies is not the same as verification of the premises the arguer starts from, such as facts that the arguer asserts or principles that the arguer assumes as the foundation for constructing arguments. For more about this, see our 'What is Fallacy Checking?'
NO AI TRAINING
Without in any way limiting the author’s [and publisher’s] exclusive rights under copyright, any use of this publication to “train” generative artificial intelligence (AI) technologies to generate text is expressly prohibited. The author reserves all rights to license uses of this work for generative AI training and development of machine learning language models.
Comments