The debate on housing often focuses on construction speed and new materials. But the real obstacle is not technical: it is rampant speculation. As long as land remains a financial asset in the hands of a few, any advancement in building will be irrelevant for those who cannot afford rent. The solution lies in public policies that regulate the market, not in more construction startups.
The fallacy of construction efficiency as a sole solution 🏗️
No matter how much 3D printing or prefabrication reduces costs and timelines, the final price of a home depends 60% on the land. If that land is hoarded by large landlords or investment funds, housing will always be expensive. Technical innovation is useful, but without a public bank that acquires and manages land for residential use, and without legal limits on rents, we will continue paying luxury prices for minimal apartments. The State must intervene directly.
Build fast, but pay for the land as if it were gold 💰
Sure, we can erect a building in three days with cutting-edge technology. Then we discover that the square meter of the plot costs as much as a high-end car. It's like selling a restaurant menu at Michelin-star prices but with expired ingredients. Next time a guru promises cheap houses with 3D printing, ask him how much the plot where he plans to print is worth. Spoiler: he won't say it.