
Why Is Housing So Expensive? It All Comes Back To Workforce
Coincidence? An HVAC rollup is a long way from the well-traveled B-school path of joining an investment bank or consulting firm. The conversation pursued whether this was, in fact, a trend. Search funds are by no means new, although it appears they've become more popular for new MBAs. But all agreed on one thing: if there was a meme about new business school grads attempting HVAC rollups, it was indisputable. I doubted it and bet Achieve Principal Cassidy Leventhal $10. Well, the meme-savvy Gen Z analysts began looking and, within seconds, found this one. I paid Cassidy her $10. And although I conceded the trend (and would never underestimate the tendency of MBAs to follow one), the affair of the HVAC rollup meme led me to suspect there's a meme for pretty much everything.
Turns out it's not limited to HVAC. New business school grads are also attempting to roll up roofing, plumbing, and landscaping companies. These businesses are easy to understand. So it could be a reaction against complex tech and AI. But it's also because no matter what happens in the economy, 330 million of us need a place to live, and tens of millions are having an extraordinarily hard time.
America is missing between four and eight million homes. As in any shortage, prices rise. Adjusted for inflation, new homes cost twice as much as they did in 1960. So the existing housing stock is increasingly out of reach for low- and middle-income families, particularly in coastal states. The shortage of affordable housing is a gargantuan problem that limits quality of life and economic opportunity in nearly every community while leaving nearly a million Americans – including 150,000 children – without a home.
The only solution is to build more new houses and apartments. With a shortage of around a million units, California is Ground Zero of the housing crisis. Homes in California cost more than twice the national average. So six million Californian families rent rather than own with two million spending more than half their monthly income on rent. So far California has attempted to tackle the problem by forcing cities and towns to allow apartments in neighborhoods of single-family homes and threatening to strip land-use authority from municipalities that don't approve new housing more quickly. Nonetheless, California's housing crisis continues to grow.
What we need more of.
getty
The fundamental problem is that it's more expensive than ever to build new homes. The cause isn't tariffs on Canadian steel and lumber, at least not yet. It's labor. There are about 250,000 unfilled jobs in the construction sector. Builders can't find enough carpenters, plumbers, or electricians. Without enough new tradespeople, the workforce is aging; since 2018, there's been a 6% drop in the percentage of construction workers below the age of 55. To replace laborers who've labored long enough, builders need to recruit nearly 750,000 new workers each year. And that number is from the Biden years, before the country decided illegal immigrants were the cause of all our problems. (Immigrants – legal and not – constituted over 40% of California's construction workforce.) It's not only building new homes; it's maintaining existing homes. Every year America needs to produce over 40,000 new HVAC technicians. If we don't, things might get uncomfortable. And some recent business school grads might find their rollups at risk.
When there aren't enough workers, builders pay more. When Engineering News-Record initiated its construction cost index for non-residential buildings, labor was 38% of total construction cost. Today it's 81%. For housing, Procore, the leading SaaS platform for construction management, reports labor is as much 60% of total cost. And when builders don't have available crews, they turn down projects. The result is that new houses and apartments don't get built and the ones that do get built cost a lot more.
Builders aren't totally helpless. Their ability to find new workers isn't limited to driving their F-150s to the Home Depot parking lot to see who happens to be standing around. They can also drive to the nearest high school and try to sell students on a future in home construction. The problem is that students won't be productive on day one, or maybe in year one. They need apprenticeships, internships, or similar earn-and-learn pathways to make the trades attractive: jobs that pay a living wage from the drop, with the promise of making much more as they master the trade.
But these programs are expensive to set up. Builders need to invest in recruiting as well as developing and delivering training, both formal and on-the-job. Which means convincing experienced workers to play ball. And finding and paying someone to manage it all, not to mention mentoring. While trade unions help, they don't address builders' biggest constraint: paying workers who aren't going to be productive for months, and maybe much longer. Also, unions are disincentivized to increase the supply of new workers, which could depress the wages of their members.
It turns out homebuilders are singularly ill-suited to make these investments. My friend Bob Lerman, co-founder of Apprenticeships for America, alerted me to a new paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research which surfaces a remarkable fact: 40% of single-family housing employees work in firms with fewer than five employees and 63% work for companies with fewer than 10 employees. This means two things: first, an opportunity for recent business school grads to roll them up; second, a constitutional inability to invest in earn-and-learn pathways. Homebuilding may be America's last mom-and-pop business.
The NBER paper identifies the culprit: local land-use regulation and permitting. Each city and town sets its own ground rules (and its own revenue-generating permitting fees), making it prohibitive for builders to undertake bigger projects or operate across jurisdictions. Many communities require builders to engage in outreach to neighbors to gain approval, or at least quiet critics likely to attend a planning meeting. Whereas communities organize to protest big construction projects orchestrated by big, bad, out-of-town developers, critics are less likely to show up for small-scale projects or go against small, local builders. The result is small projects built by small builders.
Various studies have documented a decline in productivity in the building sector since 1970 – a dramatic reversal from the prior 30 years. Not coincidentally, 1970 marked the beginning of the local land-use regulation boom. The paper finds a strong correlation between areas with stricter, iconoclastic rules and smaller, less productive builders. Smaller builders are less productive because they don't invest in new technologies or new and more efficient building methods. And they don't invest in apprenticeships, internships, and other earn-and-learn pathways. Which means they don't have enough workers. Which means they end up spending more on labor for each project.
Hence a recent Wall Street Journal article on Father Judge, a Catholic high school in Philadelphia where companies are actively recruiting students into entry-level jobs in the trades. These include the local transit system, submarine manufacturers, an operator of nuclear power plants, a defense contractor, and a chain of auto body shops. But nary a homebuilder.
Why is America capable of manufacturing pretty much everything except homes? Because the vast majority of homes are custom-built on site – 'stick-built'– vs. mass produced or prefabricated. Prefabricated homes are built in factories, then transported to the site and assembled. More than a century after the assembly line revolutionized manufacturing, large manufacturers of durable and consumer goods capture 80%+ market share; in housing, it's only 13%. One reason is lack of competition: shipping costs make it prohibitive to offshore homebuilding. But domestic prefabrication – bringing the assembly line to housing – is possible and reduces labor costs.
Canada, which is experiencing an even greater housing shortage, is making a big bet on prefabrication. The newly elected Liberal government has promised $25B in loans to prefab housing manufacturers. If the U.S. made a comparable investment, millions of new houses and apartments would be prefabricated and builders with sufficient scale to invest in factories would be able to invest in apprenticeships, internships, and other earn-and-learn pathways rather than putting together a crew from whomever happens to be standing around the Home Depot parking lot.
It's not only homes. Lack of earn-and-learn pathways and the resulting labor crunch also explain why construction costs for roads and bridges have gotten out of control. And why America can't seem to build big things like subway line extensions. And don't get me started on the tram at Los Angeles International Airport: under construction for over six years, perhaps because I've never seen anyone working on it. Or high-speed rail in California, which depresses everyone who looks at it.
But I'd trade public infrastructure for affordable homes. Out-of-control construction costs aren't only limiting the number of units being built, but also what's getting built. Because less expensive units produce less profit, homebuilders have shifted to higher cost housing rather than units low- and middle-income families can afford. This luxury shift also creates a vicious circle as custom features and advanced technology require specialized workers, further fueling the cost of labor. The result is even less affordable housing. Which makes life even harder for those struggling with unemployment or underemployment and lack of career pathways – the very thing that's making homebuilding more expensive.
The shortage of earn-and-learn pathways stems from America's unique college-for-all approach to career launch, a trend that also dates from around 1970, and a trend that's led to taxpayers investing $1,000 in classroom-based, tuition-based, debt-based career launch infrastructure for every $1 invested in work-based, earn-and-learn career launch infrastructure. This imbalance is particularly problematic for the trades, which are better learned on the job than in a classroom. But the overall track record isn't great:
Just like college-for-all – a policy set by elites who went to college decades ago – local land-use and permitting rules are set by people who bought custom, on-site, stick-built homes decades ago. And just like college-for-all is no longer affordable for all, stick-built homes are no longer affordable for all. Particularly for those in greatest need of education and housing.
Both education and housing have become games rigged in favor of wealthy incumbents – older Americans who've already checked both boxes – while young Americans are left behind. While holding out hope for reform on both fronts at all levels of government, one way to kill two birds with one stone is to scale investment in earn-and-learn pathways to careers in the building trades. Builders should be incentivized to recruit students from vocational high schools like Father Judge, but also any grad with an interest in a trade apprenticeship regardless of prior skills or experience. Because that's what apprenticeship is for.
We need affordable new homes. But to build affordable new homes, we need to scale investment in earn-and-learn pathways to flood the (construction) zone with new tradespeople. We can't have one without the other. If housing costs too much, we need to continue to chip away at NIMBY local land-use rules while beginning to cover the cost of trade apprentice training in full and subsidizing the wages of apprentices until they become productive. And the funding should be formula-based and simple for a small builder to tap.
Perhaps some underemployed members of Gen Z will build memes about this. Because they're clearly not building homes.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why Tesla's valuation is hard to read as Musk's EV empire falters
Prickly billionaire Elon Musk is at a crossroads with Tesla (TSLA) — and investors are shouldering the outsized risk. "I think we are in the transition phase, so it's a very critical phase for Tesla at the moment," Gradient Investments' Lisa Schreiber said on Yahoo Finance's Opening Bid (watch above). On July 23, Tesla reported much weaker second quarter earnings compared to a year ago. During the earnings call, Musk cautioned about headwinds and shared that ride-hailing and autonomous features will be a key focus for the company going forward. Shares fell directly after the earnings announcement and closed down 8.2% on Thursday. Tesla remains an innovator, with robots and AI in its portfolio. Its EV business, however, is sharply declining as competition rises and backlash grows against Musk's politics. The expiration of a $7,500 federal credit for EVs won't help matters, either. "When we look at valuation, investors do not know exactly how to value [Tesla]. Is it an EV maker? Is it more than that? The thing is, it's not just an EV play anymore," Schrieber said. "But it's also not a robotaxi [and] robot company already. So we have struggles here." To Schrieber's point, Tesla's stock trades more like a hot tech player trying to take on juggernauts like Nvidia (NVDA). Shares trade at 161 times the estimated forward price to earnings. (Nvidia, with much stronger growth, trades around 55 times.) Ford (F), a pure-play automaker, trades at 9.6 times. Meanwhile, some perceive Tesla as a company that isn't sure what it wants to be when it grows up. The innovation around autonomous driving is noteworthy, but the waiting can make even the most patient investor antsy. "Especially with Tesla, we have to be a little bit careful," Schreiber said, noting that Musk has a history of huge promises but delayed launches. The robotaxi, for instance, launched this past June in Austin, Texas. William Blair analysts Jed Dorsheimer and Mark Shooter, who rate Tesla's stock at Market Perform, noted that rival company Google's (GOOG) Waymo robotaxi "represents a six-year head start." "We think the training wheels will get taken off quickly and the pace at which robotaxi scales will surprise the upside," the pair wrote. "Although maybe not to half of Americans by the end of the year." During Tesla's earnings call, Musk also discussed humanoid robots, AI, and their integration into the vehicle fleet, calling the company's cars "essentially a four-wheeled robot." "Optimus is a robot with arms and legs," he said. "So the same principles that apply to optimizing AI inference of the car applied to Optimus because they're both really robots in different forms." If Musk and Co. can deliver, investors like Schreiber will likely be among the first in line to celebrate, but for the time being, they are content to watch and wait. "I think we have to be a little bit careful here," she said. "For us to be able to be a buyer here, we would need to see some foot on the ground and we would need to see some realization first."Grace Williams is a writer for Yahoo Finance. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Is Investing in "The DORKs" a Good Idea Right Now?
Key Points The DORK stocks -- Krispy Kreme, Opendoor Technologies, Rocket Companies, and Kohl's -- are getting attention. Each of these companies is losing money, but trading volume is spiking. 10 stocks we like better than Krispy Kreme › There's a new investing trend out there. Well, perhaps "newish" is the best way to put it, because to my eyes this is just a recycling of the meme stock fad that swept through the markets four years ago. That didn't end well for a lot of people, and I have similar expectations for this one. The stocks feeding into this trend are known as DORK stocks -- an acronym for the stock tickers of Krispy Kreme (NASDAQ: DNUT), Opendoor Technologies (NASDAQ: OPEN), Rocket Companies (NYSE: RKT), and Kohl's (NYSE: KSS). Just as in the meme stock boom of old, some of these companies are seeing wild changes in price and valuation for no good reason. But the trading volume is up as investors' interest is piqued. If the DORK stock name isn't enough to scare you off, then perhaps a closer look at the companies would do it. However -- and I can't stress this enough -- investing in DORK stocks seems to be a really bad idea. If you're itching to try it, here's what you should know. Hype isn't a realistic strategy First, let's take a look at the companies. Krispy Kreme makes great doughnuts, but I'm not willing to say it's a good investment today. Opendoor, which operates a digital platform that allows people to sell their houses, is linked closely to Rocket Companies, which allows people to apply for mortgages and manage their money. Kohl's is a struggling big-box clothing retailer. Krispy Kreme saw first-quarter revenue drop by 15% from a year ago, and posted a loss of $33.4 million and an earnings per share loss of $0.20. Opendoor's Q1 revenue dropped by 2%, to $1.2 billion, and the company posted a net loss of $85 million. Rocket saw its Q1 revenue drop 25% from a year ago to $1.03 billion, and posted a loss of $212 million. And Kohl's saw net sales for the first quarter drop 4.1% to $3 billion. Like other DORK names, Kohl's was in the red for the quarter, posting a loss of $15 million. So, the DORK stocks, at least today, are officially losers. But there are a few meme-type catalysts that are pushing them into the public eye, such as short interest. Rocket and Kohl's both have more than half of their outstanding shares shorted, while Opendoor has more than 30%. All of those numbers are incredibly high. When investors short a stock, they're betting that the price will go down, so there's a lot of money out there betting that these names will drop. Retail investors can lap up additional shares in hope that hedge funds that are betting against a stock will find themselves squeezed and have to sell at a higher price -- similar to the infamous short squeeze of GameStop in 2021. We're back to 2021 I know there are lots of retail investors who enjoyed the 2021 meme stock fad that included names like GameStop, AMC Entertainment, and BlackBerry. I wasn't one of them. In fact, I wrote pretty stridently against investing in meme stocks, because I see it as a sure way of losing money over the long term. When you're trading on pure momentum without a solid underlying business, you're just asking to lose your money. Some of the DORK stocks are already showing major volatility. Kohl's, which normally has a trading volume of 13 million shares, saw 209 million shares traded on July 22. The stock price jumped 120% over a two-day period, but has since lost nearly all those gains. Opendoor became hot when a hedge fund manager put a price target of $82 on the stock, which had been struggling to remain at more than $1 and avoid potentially being delisted from the Nasdaq. Now Opendoor is up 380% in the last month (although at this writing, it still trades for less than $2.50 per share). The stock saw massive trading volume of 1.8 billion shares on July 21 and 1.07 billion shares on July 23. (Its average volume is only 164.8 million shares.) Krispy Kreme's shares haven't been as volatile (probably because the short interest is comparatively low). But it still had more than 152 million shares trade hands on July 23, compared to its average trading day of 8.2 million. Rocket Companies also saw action July 22 and July 23 as more than 51 million shares changed hands each day, versus the company's average trading volume of 15.4 million shares. But the reality is that you can't time the market, and many more people lose money than win trades with meme stocks. Because short-term stock prices are a product of supply and demand, you can't predict how a stock price will move -- and if you guess wrong, you could sustain some big losses. How to invest My advice is to hold back. There are hundreds of better choices than a meme stock, and you should instead be looking for names with good fundamentals, decent profit, and a sustainable business model. But if you are determined to invest in DORK stocks, hedge your bets. Invest responsibly, with only a small part of your portfolio that you are willing to lose. You never want to overplay your hand, particularly with volatile investments -- and those include DORK stocks. Should you buy stock in Krispy Kreme right now? Before you buy stock in Krispy Kreme, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Krispy Kreme wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $636,628!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,063,471!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,041% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 183% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 21, 2025 Patrick Sanders has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool recommends BlackBerry and Rocket Companies. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Is Investing in "The DORKs" a Good Idea Right Now? was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
A Data Deluge Brings a ‘Moment of Truth' for Markets This Week
(Bloomberg) -- Wall Street pros are staring down a pivotal week that will likely set the tone for the rest of the year in markets and the economy. The High Costs of Trump's 'Big Beautiful' New Car Loan Deduction Can This Bridge Ease the Troubled US-Canadian Relationship? Trump Administration Sues NYC Over Sanctuary City Policy First and foremost is the conclusion of the Federal Reserve's meeting on Wednesday, and although it isn't expected to cut interest rates, traders and investors will be poring over commentary for clues about the path ahead. Then there's a string of Big Tech earnings with Inc., Apple Inc., Meta Platforms Inc. and Microsoft Corp. all reporting. And sprinkled throughout are some of the leading indicators on the state of the economy, from gross domestic product to nonfarm payrolls. In other words, if there ever was a five-day stretch that would define the second half of the year, this is it. 'This week's packed calendar — trade negotiations, the FOMC, the jobs report and four of the Magnificent Seven names reporting — makes it truly a moment of truth for markets,' said Julian Emanuel, chief equity and quantitative strategist at Evercore ISI. He was referring to the Federal Open Market Committee, the panel within the Fed that sets interest rates. The fire hose of releases will test investors' faith in the resilience of the US economy and the stock market's seemingly unstoppable rise. And with President Donald Trump's self-imposed tariff deadline of Aug. 1 — which he's said won't be extended — markets are hoping for some sense of stability on trade negotiations after months of whiplash. 'I think there is more of a chance of markets getting clarity on the continued resilience of the economy, while we get less clarity on the trade front,' said Kevin Gordon, senior investment strategist for Charles Schwab & Co. ''Reciprocal tariff' deadlines are staggered for some of our largest partners, and there are still lingering questions around already-announced deal frameworks, so I don't think of Aug. 1 as some magical date on which we'll stop being gripped by tariff anxiety.' S&P 500 companies are generally beating forecasts and profits are up 4.5% from this time a year ago, according to Bloomberg Intelligence data. Firms like Southwest Airlines Co., which said tariffs shaved $1 billion from its annual pre-tax profit this year, expect to see improvements in the second half. 'We already see signs that demand is coming back in volumes,' Chief Executive Officer Bob Jordan said in an interview. Much of the earnings strength is being driven by wealthier customers. American Airlines Group Inc. highlighted strength in their premium cabin demand, while Deckers Outdoor Corp. cited pricey shoes like Ugg sheepskin boots and Hoka sneakers. United Airlines Holdings Inc. and Delta Air Lines Inc., said corporate travel was leading their rebounds. On the flip side, Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc. cut its guidance because the 'lower-income consumer is under pressure,' Chief Executive Officer Scott Boatwright said, which has led to a drop in spending. There are other signs of stress, with companies like Conagra Brands Inc. and Abbott Laboratories discussing higher costs due to tariffs. In particular, consumer discretionary stocks are expected to see profit declines into the start of 2026 as trade policies start to bite, Bloomberg Intelligence strategists Gina Martin Adams and Michael Casper warn. 'We already have some corporate commentary as to what effect tariffs are having and will at an individual level,' said Dan Greenhaus, chief economist and market strategist at Solus Alternative Asset Management. 'But the truth is, we probably need several more months before having a firmer handle on the cost distribution.' Economic Uncertainty Economic data has also been uneven as the tariff impact is just starting to hit. The government's initial estimate of second-quarter GDP is expected to show a notable rebound in growth after a monumental surge in imports caused a contraction at the start of the year. 'It won't be until after the market and economy have had an opportunity to digest the new tariff rates that become effective on Friday that we will know where we stand,' said Michael O'Rourke, chief market strategist at JonesTrading LLC. Other reports due this week may point to some softening in the economy. Economists expect consumer spending barely grew in June after adjusting for inflation, and other estimates point to a continued slowdown in hiring and uptick in unemployment. They're also projecting an acceleration in the Fed's preferred measure of inflation — the personal consumption expenditures price index — as tariffs start to hit. 'It's not the cliff that most people are always looking for when it comes to an economic downturn, but it is a visible slowdown if you take the time to actually lift the hood and look at the underlying details,' said Gregory Daco, chief economist at EY-Parthenon. Despite all the uncertainty, the stock market is trading at record highs as fears of worst-case tariff scenarios have failed to materialize. The question is how long that can last. 'I think there are a few different factors here. First, there are signals that the labor market is holding up well, wages are growing faster than inflation — both of which supports the consumer in aggregate,' said Cayla Seder, macro multi-asset strategist at State Street. 'When it comes to the stock market, earnings have been beating a low bar, which has indicated the companies are holding up better than feared.' --With assistance from Shelly Banjo and Matt Turner. Burning Man Is Burning Through Cash It's Not Just Tokyo and Kyoto: Tourists Descend on Rural Japan Confessions of a Laptop Farmer: How an American Helped North Korea's Wild Remote Worker Scheme Elon Musk's Empire Is Creaking Under the Strain of Elon Musk A Rebel Army Is Building a Rare-Earth Empire on China's Border ©2025 Bloomberg L.P.