Live data from Hacker News

Home ownership is the West’s biggest economic-policy mistake

economist.com

71–80 of 497 posts

Re: Home ownership is the West’s biggest economic-policy mistake

#71
post #41
post #4

What's this obsession with increasing housing density? Population in the developing world is leveling off. Most of the developed world is already at "peak child".[1] Housing shortages come from migration to cities, not more people. [1] https://ourworldindata.org/peak-child

> What's this obsession with increasing housing density? Wealth inequality is compounded when urban real estate appreciates faster. The Economist blithely ignores why governments are obsessed with homeownership, though--because homeownership tends to negatively correlate with wealth inequality. That is, the greater rate of homeownership, the less wealth inequality. So rents may be stable in Germany, but so is its mod…

I'm not sure the links support the thesis that "the greater rate of homeownership, the less wealth inequality."

The first source explicitly says that this only occurs "in countries where homeownership is widespread" (p. 67), and it makes the poor half of the owners vulnerable to price changes.

More importantly, the second document has an arbitrary selection of countries that supports its cause and ignores others. The relationship completely breaks for e.g. Denmark with ownership rate 61% and a Gini coefficient of 0.25 or Sweden (63%, 0.3).

One of the reasons is that ownership ratio alone doesn't explain how the non-privately owned housing is structured. For example Eastern Germany has much lower individual ownership rate (and lower inequality) than Western Germany. The rental units though are mostly owned by either by municipal enterprises or cooperatives (both due to the socialist history of this part of the country, the formerly public enterprises were transformed to their western analogues) - neither of which usually try to drive rents up.

Re: Home ownership is the West’s biggest economic-policy mistake

#72

Owner occupation of property vs rent seeking ownership are 2 very different paradigms. The former results in community, and investment and a large number of beneficial economic effects. The later is simply an economic parasite Only have to look to the past to see what happened with farming. Substance farming and feudaliam was inefficient and disincentified investment.(why improve land you don't own and someone else r…

Reminds me of Three Acres and a Cow [1]. I do find it an interesting concept; but I think the general principle I would agree with is more of decentralizing production by making people more free so that they can buy their own land or means of production and use it; rather than coercive legislation against acquisition of property.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_acres_and_a_cow

Re: Home ownership is the West’s biggest economic-policy mistake

#73

Next up, living in families shown to be inefficient, newborns should be matched in a skills based auction at birth. => There is more to life than supply and demand, and home ownership has a hidden effect on societal responsibility, wellbeing and a life milestone

Actually who you are born to is probably the number 1 driver of inequality. If you really wanted something more equitable, you would probably require that no children be raised by their parents and be turned over to a state run children's home at birth.

Re: Home ownership is the West’s biggest economic-policy mistake

#74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seen from another angle, homeownership (once the mortgage has been paid) grants freedom, while a rent-dweller will remain a slave to his landlord forever, with Damocles's sword named "Eviction and homelessness" always dangling over their heads.

I'm a millennial and I plan to rent forever because I value the ability to move out whenever I liked. Even homeowners can't escape that sword of Damocles you describe. IMO as long as you have assets (stocks, cash, etc.) that you can periodically liquidate to cover expenses, the form of those assets doesn't matter.

The form of those assets absolutely matters. Bonds right now? Bad idea. Cash when we hit the inflation part of the long term debt cycle? Also bad idea.

Re: Home ownership is the West’s biggest economic-policy mistake

#75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seen from another angle, homeownership (once the mortgage has been paid) grants freedom, while a rent-dweller will remain a slave to his landlord forever, with Damocles's sword named "Eviction and homelessness" always dangling over their heads.

I'm a millennial and I plan to rent forever because I value the ability to move out whenever I liked. Even homeowners can't escape that sword of Damocles you describe. IMO as long as you have assets (stocks, cash, etc.) that you can periodically liquidate to cover expenses, the form of those assets doesn't matter.

I am a GenXer and after some time I got tired of obnoxious landlords. Plus, after living in 12 different places and not knowing when the next "please move out, I need this apartment for other purposes" note comes, is sorta stressful.

Every coin has two sides. I can imagine that expensive real property may be a burden that prevents you from living fully. I can also imagine having a house as an anchor in a place I love.

Re: Home ownership is the West’s biggest economic-policy mistake

#76
post #4

What's this obsession with increasing housing density? Population in the developing world is leveling off. Most of the developed world is already at "peak child".[1] Housing shortages come from migration to cities, not more people. [1] https://ourworldindata.org/peak-child

If you had a farm with cattle, would you want each cow to live in its own small place or would you pack all cows efficiently under one roof and move them around in bulk?

Re: Home ownership is the West’s biggest economic-policy mistake

#77
post #48

I don't think this article makes a logical argument at all. It says house ownership is bad because it gives people a vested interest in constraining the supply of housing. That's true but that's not a problem. If people didn't own houses then someone would, and that someone is still incentivized to constrain the supply. I'm also not sure that reducing home ownership is a good idea - "let's make everyone poorer" doesn…

> If people didn't own houses then someone would, and that someone is still incentivized to constrain the supply.

Yes, but constraining the supply is done through political means: planning laws, green belts, individual objections to developments, voting etc. All of those in theory are based on "one man one vote", so if you concentrate ownership of supply you drastically reduce the number of votes it gets.

> the middle class who used to be able to live in a nice semi/detatched house are now living in flats in a skyscraper that is a massive detriment to their quality of life

People in Singapore really love their flats. I think what people don't realise is that the space between the skyscrapers is well used with lots of playgrounds, parks and sports facilities. It isn't giving up your garden: it's swapping it for a much larger shared garden with facilities you could never dream of affording on your own.

HMOs aren't a fair comparison because they have comical soundproofing compared to modern flats.

Re: Home ownership is the West’s biggest economic-policy mistake

#78
Property ownership is bad. Rent for life, dont leave inheritance to your children so they can rent for life too. All you need in life is clothing, entertainment, a bit of travel to distract you from your tiny living space, maybe a gadget or two and of course onsite work. Oh and praise from you manager to add meaning to your daily grind.

Or so “they” say while “they” amass thousands of properties and massive fortunes while we get tagged, farmed in office buildings, monitored and ignored in politics.

/Sarcasm

Sorry, I am bitter about this because I simply dont buy in to this concept. Owning your own home is, in my view, the first step towards financial freedom.

Downvote away but i strongly believe this concept is horrible.

Re: Home ownership is the West’s biggest economic-policy mistake

#79

What if renters could have a way to pay more to gain partial ownership of their property? E.g., could progressively own up to 10%. That woulf allow for more of the feeling of ownership and allow renters to participate in the appreciation. That would mitigate some of the negative impacts of gentrification. Has anyone given this sort of renter-ownership blend a thought?

Imagine a system where renters could put up a small fee, say 3-5% of the homes value, then just continue paying their monthly "rent" payment as usual. However, each time they pay that monthly rent a portion of that payment goes directly to them as equity. That way years later they could move and benefit from that equity position or after a certain period of time, say 30 years, own the entire home outright.

Oh wait...

Re: Home ownership is the West’s biggest economic-policy mistake

#80
Even from the title, the implication is that "home ownership" is a "policy" from the government rather than just a natural state of people acquiring and improving the land. It implies the government can simply revoke home ownership by a new policy.

Property ownership and improvement isn't a privilege "given" to us by a benevolent government with their immaculate "policies" from time immemorial. People are the source of government power. People build houses.

The government doesn't own us. We own the government.

Post reply on HN