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

House prices surpass housing-bubble peak on price-to-rent ratio

stlouisfed.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 139 posts

Re: House prices surpass housing-bubble peak on price-to-rent ratio

#71

Post by yunohn »

silicon2401 wrote: post #67
akudha wrote: post #35

I wish something is done about these rentiers. Someone I know is amassing a rental property portfolio, while I am struggling to buy my first home. I am not against people making money and getting rich, but it would be nice if it wasn’t so easy to buy up multiple properties simply because they have the cash. There should be all kinds of incentives for first time home buyers. But it should be made very expensive/very p…

> Along the same lines, Bill Gates owns 242,000 acres of farm land. What for? I don’t know. The point of freedom is that it doesn't matter why he wants it, he's free to buy it if the owner chooses to sell it. There's a chilling implication in your stance that people should need approval for basic freedoms like buying land. That's how you end up with a dictatorship.

> approval for basic freedoms like buying land. That's how you end up with a dictatorship.

That escalated quickly. Nobody argued you need approval to buy land. We’re talking about purchasing thousands of acres of land, and exerting that kind of influence.

This is exactly a temporarily embarrassed millionaire example - you wanna buy yourself some investment properties, so you’re sitting here arguing on behalf of the richest man on earth.

Re: House prices surpass housing-bubble peak on price-to-rent ratio

#72

Post by akudha »

silicon2401 wrote: post #67
akudha wrote: post #35

I wish something is done about these rentiers. Someone I know is amassing a rental property portfolio, while I am struggling to buy my first home. I am not against people making money and getting rich, but it would be nice if it wasn’t so easy to buy up multiple properties simply because they have the cash. There should be all kinds of incentives for first time home buyers. But it should be made very expensive/very p…

> Along the same lines, Bill Gates owns 242,000 acres of farm land. What for? I don’t know. The point of freedom is that it doesn't matter why he wants it, he's free to buy it if the owner chooses to sell it. There's a chilling implication in your stance that people should need approval for basic freedoms like buying land. That's how you end up with a dictatorship.

That is not at all what I am implying. When you buy that much amount of land, which is a basic human necessity, at minimum the public needs to know what the plans are for those lands, right? If someone buys 5 acres of land, that is a different story, nobody cares. The scale is what making the difference here.

Let me ask you another question - recently (2019 I think), Bill bought 14,500 acres of land for 171M in a single deal. 171M is pocket change for Bill. According to your logic, he can continue to buy farmlands across the country (because "freedom") with nobody asking any questions. What happens if he ends up owning half (or 75% or whatever) of all available farmlands? You want one single man to control your food supply?

He can buy all the Ferraris/Picassos/megayachts etc on the planet, that would make zero difference to anyone (except maybe other billionaires). It is when he starts buying water sources, land etc it becomes a problem. It has nothing to do with dictatorship.

Re: House prices surpass housing-bubble peak on price-to-rent ratio

#73

Post by anon98356 »

question000 wrote: post #49
vinw wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> houses have never decreased in value historically Never?

Yes literally never in my lifetime, even after the 2008 recession those same houses are worth more now then ever. Any findings that show house values are "going down" are just sampling errors, or more likely people being purposefully misleading by distorting the trends.

Firstly, never and never in your lifetime are two very different timespans.

Second, just because those houses from 2008 recession are now worth more than in 2008 doesn't mean they have been steadily increasing in value since 2008. There have definitely been downturns in the property market. One in particular that springs to mind is the impact of Brexit on house prices in London. Sure, eventually the price might recover to the point that homes are worth more than pre Brexit. But if you are trying to sell in the meantime that drop can have a significant impact on your ability to move.

Re: House prices surpass housing-bubble peak on price-to-rent ratio

#74

Post by akudha »

silicon2401 wrote: post #69
akudha wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The very fact that you are trying to rationalize someone buying multiple homes at the expense of someone trying to buy their first home highlights the problem. Take Canada for example. A whole lot of homes are bought by Chinese buyers and are sitting idle, at the expense of Canadians trying to buy their first home. How can you say this is morally right? It is all find and dandy for the Chinese buyers, but what of Can…

This is a great example of the many flaws in globalism. If Canada were to put higher restrictions on foreign real estate purchases, Canadians wouldn't be in such a pickle. The flaw of generosity is that it leaves you vulnerable to being taken advantage of, which is what's happening in this case.

If such laws are put in place, it would handle only foreign buyers. It still wouldn't handle local born rentiers. There should be some kind of robust policy change. It would be hard, since landlords aren't exactly a friendly bunch (just look at San Francisco).

Re: House prices surpass housing-bubble peak on price-to-rent ratio

#75

Post by pnutjam »

yunohn wrote: post #63
pnutjam wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All taxes are passed on is a very simplistic view. Do I pass the taxes on to my employer when I negotiate salary? Probably to some extent, but this is like saying all cubes are squares and calling it good enough. EDIT: typo

Maybe you misunderstood my post, but I was not arguing that this is a good thing. But indeed, when you negotiate a higher salary, your employer pays more taxes. And this cost is passed on to the end-users of your employer’s business.

I was pointing out this view of "everything is passed on" is simplistic. There are multiple pots that can all be used. Profit, R&D, Cost to consumer, etc...

Re: House prices surpass housing-bubble peak on price-to-rent ratio

#76

Post by [deleted] »

akudha wrote: post #72
silicon2401 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Along the same lines, Bill Gates owns 242,000 acres of farm land. What for? I don’t know. The point of freedom is that it doesn't matter why he wants it, he's free to buy it if the owner chooses to sell it. There's a chilling implication in your stance that people should need approval for basic freedoms like buying land. That's how you end up with a dictatorship.

That is not at all what I am implying. When you buy that much amount of land, which is a basic human necessity, at minimum the public needs to know what the plans are for those lands, right? If someone buys 5 acres of land, that is a different story, nobody cares. The scale is what making the difference here. Let me ask you another question - recently (2019 I think), Bill bought 14,500 acres of land for 171M in a sin…

[deleted]

Re: House prices surpass housing-bubble peak on price-to-rent ratio

#77

Post by mgarfias »

akudha wrote: post #35

I wish something is done about these rentiers. Someone I know is amassing a rental property portfolio, while I am struggling to buy my first home. I am not against people making money and getting rich, but it would be nice if it wasn’t so easy to buy up multiple properties simply because they have the cash. There should be all kinds of incentives for first time home buyers. But it should be made very expensive/very p…

> Along the same lines, Bill Gates owns 242,000 acres of farm land. What for?

I dunno? Maybe to grow food?

Re: House prices surpass housing-bubble peak on price-to-rent ratio

#78

Post by yunohn »

pnutjam wrote: post #75
yunohn wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you misunderstood my post, but I was not arguing that this is a good thing. But indeed, when you negotiate a higher salary, your employer pays more taxes. And this cost is passed on to the end-users of your employer’s business.

I was pointing out this view of "everything is passed on" is simplistic. There are multiple pots that can all be used. Profit, R&D, Cost to consumer, etc...

I don’t understand how profit and r&d are pots for tax losses? Could you clarify what exactly you mean?

A great example is Apple/other electronic products in the EU. They’re just straight up 30% more expensive, which is approximately the extra taxes they incur in EU vs USA.

This includes higher VAT, taxes, and even labor/payroll.

Re: House prices surpass housing-bubble peak on price-to-rent ratio

#79

Post by javiermaestro »

bequanna wrote: post #27
aurizon wrote: post #20

Of course, this is a massive arranged crime akin to and having it's roots in the sub-prime mortgage crash. Rates are low. corporations can borrow unlimited cash and buy a residence, then rent it out to get 4-5% interest and pay 1.5 to 2.5 = risk free make the spread with no limits. I would like to borrow 10 billion and buy a zillion homes and make the spread ~~3%. They hire property managers and that costs .5% to .75…

This isn’t how taxation works or even can work. It would be trivial to avoid the tax you propose if it is based on income from the properties. If the tax is more like a property tax then it would be impossible for it to not be passed on to renters. Indeed, ALL taxes are passed onto consumers!

Mmmm, not sure if that would be the case / possible with something like "First home for your use, you get tax exemptions, etc. Second house, for you, X amount of taxes. If rented, Y% of the income. Third house rented, insane % of the income (like 50%)". That would discourage people from buying-to-rent massive amounts of properties, as they would simply not be cost-effective, regardless of how much you want to pass on to the renters.

If you think that would raise rents by a huge %, I don't think so, as it would be completely impossible for people to pay.

Re: House prices surpass housing-bubble peak on price-to-rent ratio

#80

Post by silicon2401 »

akudha wrote: post #72
silicon2401 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Along the same lines, Bill Gates owns 242,000 acres of farm land. What for? I don’t know. The point of freedom is that it doesn't matter why he wants it, he's free to buy it if the owner chooses to sell it. There's a chilling implication in your stance that people should need approval for basic freedoms like buying land. That's how you end up with a dictatorship.

That is not at all what I am implying. When you buy that much amount of land, which is a basic human necessity, at minimum the public needs to know what the plans are for those lands, right? If someone buys 5 acres of land, that is a different story, nobody cares. The scale is what making the difference here. Let me ask you another question - recently (2019 I think), Bill bought 14,500 acres of land for 171M in a sin…

Who decides where the line is drawn for scale?
Post reply on HN