Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Berlin approves 5-year rent freeze

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 594 posts

Re: Berlin approves 5-year rent freeze

#271

Post by wongarsu »

jordanbeiber wrote: post #221
2T1Qka0rEiPr wrote: post #22

As much as I can sympathise with the predicament, this decision, and the Berlin housing market in general, absolutely baffles me. When I moved here I was warned of 100 people turning up to a flat viewing, and laughed it off as some hyperbole. Only later did I find out that it actually happens , albeit the maximum viewing I went to was around a meagre 50. Having come from the UK, I found the situation in Berlin to be…

It’s an interesting catch 22. The housing you make margins off are expensive housing in expensive locations. The reason to keep rents affordable is that it’s generally a good thing in terms of keeping gentrificarion and segregation in check. Cap on rent can’t be the only policy though. I see the exact same situation in Stockholm, and there’s a concensus that profit margins are not good enough. How to solve it? Either…

If the city wants something the market can't provide the solution is to do it yourself.

Berlin is partially doing that. The "Wohnungsbaugesellschaft Berlin-Mitte" is a housing association owned by the City of Berlin that builds and rents out apartments. They more or less act like other investors, just with more focus on social factors than on high profits.

Re: Berlin approves 5-year rent freeze

#272

Post by codedokode »

claudeganon wrote: post #209
cyrksoft wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every city needs people who do lower paying jobs. Someone has to clean those office buildings, someone has to take care of sick people at hospitals, someone has to drive taxis, buses, ... By not supplying those people with affordable housing within the city they're lives only become worse (more money and time spent commuting, less time spent with family and friends). They can live in the suburbs. Nobody has a speci…

This is just literally privatizing the cost of reproducing the city onto its lowest paid workers, i.e., entirely regressive. Why should those guaranteeing the very basic functioning of a place (janitors, firefighters, nurses, etc) bear not only the burden of lower wages, but now also terrible commutes? There’s no sane logic behind this kind of sentiment besides “might makes right,” which is fueling the rise of “eat t…

Then it should be skilled, talented workers who should live in a place without public transport, buy expensive cars and gasoline and spend hours in traffic jams?

Re: Berlin approves 5-year rent freeze

#273

Post by hashberry »

mrep wrote: post #257
hashberry wrote: post #31

If affordable housing is an issue, then perhaps the government should provide it for its citizens, like building huge high-rises in Berlin. I used to rent in an expensive city but bought a cheap house in the suburbs (thankfully I work remotely). Everything is cheaper out here, from gas to utilities to food. But I did experience classism from my friends and family: there is status living in a world-class city. And hav…

> But I did experience classism from my friends and family: there is status living in a world-class city. Can you go more into depth on that because I've never seen that and some of my extended family lives in small cities/farms in the midwest. If anything, they laugh because I pay $300 a month for parking. Then again, maybe chicago/seattle/san francisco aren't status bearing world class cities.

Many people treat their city as the center of the world. NYC is infamous for this. "Flyover states" is a common pejorative classist term. Every tech company sets up offices in large cities not just for the talent, but because people want to live in the city, not in the "boonies" or "in the sticks" with a bunch of "townies."

Re: Berlin approves 5-year rent freeze

#274

Post by cyrksoft »

hashberry wrote: post #261
cyrksoft wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Government should provide it for its citizens And how do you expect government to pay for that? How do you decide who lives in these houses? It's not that easy. Government isn't a magic entity.

Government bonds. The affordable rent would go towards paying off those bonds. Tenants would be selected by income level and lottery. If cities can build huge stadiums, they can build huge housing complexes.

The problem is they shouldn't be building stadiums either. You expect a lottery? So random luck will be the way to go.

Re: Berlin approves 5-year rent freeze

#275

Post by odiroot »

WalterBright wrote: post #255
2T1Qka0rEiPr wrote: post #22

As much as I can sympathise with the predicament, this decision, and the Berlin housing market in general, absolutely baffles me. When I moved here I was warned of 100 people turning up to a flat viewing, and laughed it off as some hyperbole. Only later did I find out that it actually happens , albeit the maximum viewing I went to was around a meagre 50. Having come from the UK, I found the situation in Berlin to be…

Rent control never works, but that never dissuades governments from trying it again and again. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent_regulation

Because it's a very effective populist policy to get support from the electorate.

Re: Berlin approves 5-year rent freeze

#276

Post by odiroot »

usefulcat wrote: post #4

Symptom: rents are too high Cause: insufficient housing supply Solution: disincentivize new construction?

Yes, this is how Berlin government operates, more or less.

The same logic applies to planning new underground lines and keeping the city airport functional.

Don't expect rational decisions from this city.

Re: Berlin approves 5-year rent freeze

#277

Post by blub »

usefulcat wrote: post #4

Symptom: rents are too high Cause: insufficient housing supply Solution: disincentivize new construction?

The truism of supply and demand seems to be very popular in this topic. The devil is in the details behind the supply and demand and what is influencing both.

In Berlin there's many cases of people being pushed out of their homes because of rent increases, people having to do apartment tours with 50+ other people and having spill all details about their private lives to have a chance at being chosen, etc.

The situation's crappy already. Even if the current tenants will be protected, that's already a small victory.

Re: Berlin approves 5-year rent freeze

#278

Post by blub »

Y_Y wrote: post #11

At best you'll produce consumer surplus for lucky renters, and you'll produce sad outsiders who'd be willing to to pay even more but can't get in. Everyone knows this is an issue with insufficient supply (of housing or of nice alternative places to live) but it is popular to put a ban on symptoms.

Yeah, not everyone has to live in Berlin. Better that the current citizens have reasonable living conditions than everyone paying through their nose.

Everyone knows about supply and demand, few know what the situation's like in Berlin or even care to find out before supplying us with economic platitudes for which there is little if any demand at all.

Re: Berlin approves 5-year rent freeze

#279

Post by ThePawnBreak »

2tab wrote: post #184
jupp0r wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, they just declared housing to be affordable (in the $20/month ballpark region) and people had to apply 10 years in advance to move to a larger apartment. This is my parent's experience in east Germany, should be similar to Soviet Union.

The curios thing about these anecdotes is that as dysfunctional as somewhere like the Soviet Union was, getting a affordable apartment in only 10 years would be a great deal for many today. In many metro areas property values have increased more the savings from the median income, meaning that the application, or aspiration, of the majority of people is going in reverse.

> In many metro areas property values have increased more the savings from the median income, meaning that the application, or aspiration, of the majority of people is going in reverse.

That's because a lot of people want to live in cities like Berlin. But don't worry, the Soviet Union had a solution for that, too!

You would get assigned a job by the central committee, based on grades, people you know, who you're married to, things like that. So a lot of people would get assigned to very undesirable places, such as villages or very small cities, thus solving the problem of too many people in large metros. Do you think that's an acceptable tradeoff?

Re: Berlin approves 5-year rent freeze

#280

Post by BowBun »

odiroot wrote: post #270
2T1Qka0rEiPr wrote: post #22

As much as I can sympathise with the predicament, this decision, and the Berlin housing market in general, absolutely baffles me. When I moved here I was warned of 100 people turning up to a flat viewing, and laughed it off as some hyperbole. Only later did I find out that it actually happens , albeit the maximum viewing I went to was around a meagre 50. Having come from the UK, I found the situation in Berlin to be…

> I found the situation in Berlin to be absolutely ridiculous. I totally agree with this assessment. I've never seen a city where you struggle to get a flat even if you have the money or can pay more. The market is absolutely broken with literally everyone competing for the same pool of flats.

I don't know, there's something utopian about what you describe. If the city doesn't have housing for everyone, why should the rich get it first? Leave capitalism at the door, we're talking about a roof over your head for janitors vs. business executives.

If an 'ideal' free market means the rich get the houses and the poor are on the street, because developers don't have motivation to build, then I'm happy to see everyone compete for the same housing and seeing both the rich and the poor on the street while we figure out a real solution.

Post reply on HN