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

Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

nltimes.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 598 posts

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#111

Post by thepangolino »

nmca wrote: post #42

In the long term, the ethically right answer seems pretty clearly to me to be a land value tax [0]. But due to encouragement of home ownership [1], that's not going to democratically tenable in a lot of countries for 20+ years. Unfortunate situation. [0] In 1879, a man asked "How come all this new economic development and industrialized technology hasn't eliminated poverty and oppression?" That man was Henry George,…

Wouldn't a land value tax encourage urban sprawling ?

Current ubran policies in the western world, coupled with the normalization of remote working already do this to some extent.

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#113

Post by paganel »

murgindrag wrote: post #85
nmca wrote: post #42

In the long term, the ethically right answer seems pretty clearly to me to be a land value tax [0]. But due to encouragement of home ownership [1], that's not going to democratically tenable in a lot of countries for 20+ years. Unfortunate situation. [0] In 1879, a man asked "How come all this new economic development and industrialized technology hasn't eliminated poverty and oppression?" That man was Henry George,…

I'm not sold on the Economist article. I do believe in home ownership. The idea that a person spends a lifetime in the same home and community is a good one. We're tribal creatures, and you want a tribe -- you want people to know their neighbors, have community BBQs, and live in real communities. You want enough of a vested interest in municipal politics that democratic structures work. You want kids growing up with…

Unfortunately “community barbecues” oftentimes meant “barbecues with people who are exactly like me and who think exactly like I do”, an attitude which has had a pretty corrosive effect on democracy in the near past.

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#114

Post by lifty »

saulpw wrote: post #67
nmca wrote: post #42

In the long term, the ethically right answer seems pretty clearly to me to be a land value tax [0]. But due to encouragement of home ownership [1], that's not going to democratically tenable in a lot of countries for 20+ years. Unfortunate situation. [0] In 1879, a man asked "How come all this new economic development and industrialized technology hasn't eliminated poverty and oppression?" That man was Henry George,…

How about a land value tax with an exemption for primary residence?

This sounds like a reasonable trade off which doesn’t hVe the risk of uprooting people from their primary residence.

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#115

Post by DonHopkins »

There's a history of violent protests and riots about housing in Amsterdam, and a slogan "Geen woning, geen kroning" (No house, no coronation):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amsterdam_coronation_riots

>Amsterdam coronation riots

>The Amsterdam coronation riots (Dutch: Kroningsoproer) refers to major violence and rioting in Amsterdam, the Netherlands on the day of the accession of Queen Beatrix, 30 April 1980. It was one of the biggest episodes of such disturbances in the country since the end of World War II and the most significant event of the Dutch squatters' movement (Krakersrellen).

>Since the 1960s and the 1970s, squatting had become common in Amsterdam to protest the city's shortage of housing. Many of the protesters were youngsters of the baby boomer generation. The 1980 riots were precended by the Nieuwmarkt Riots in 1975 and the Vondelstraat Riots in March 1980, when authorities heavily responded to evict squatters from properties in the city.

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#116

Post by saddlerustle »

dmje wrote: post #25

Amen to this. Two case studies from the UK I've been thinking about recently: 1) Visiting London and spending time in South Kensington - walking back to hotel at night, only about 30% of houses had any lights on. Suggestion is the others are effectively uninhabited, and a search on RightMove shows properties sell for £20-£30m for a 4/5 bed. This isn't normal Londoners, it's outside investment. 2) Cornwall, where I li…

Your first point is a misleading anecdote given there's actually data on this. The amount of empty homes in London is at a historical low [1]. Broadly, cities with the highest amount of empty homes tend to have the most affordable housing, because obviously that indicates there's more than enough housing to go round.

[1] https://i.imgur.com/jX1OpmS.png

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#117

Post by lsiebert »

toomanybeersies wrote: post #105
dmje wrote: post #25

Amen to this. Two case studies from the UK I've been thinking about recently: 1) Visiting London and spending time in South Kensington - walking back to hotel at night, only about 30% of houses had any lights on. Suggestion is the others are effectively uninhabited, and a search on RightMove shows properties sell for £20-£30m for a 4/5 bed. This isn't normal Londoners, it's outside investment. 2) Cornwall, where I li…

Has it ever been possible to buy a house on minimum wage?

Yes, depending on where you buy. Many homes are much cheaper outside of major cities.

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#118

Post by inter_netuser »

toomanybeersies wrote: post #105
dmje wrote: post #25

Amen to this. Two case studies from the UK I've been thinking about recently: 1) Visiting London and spending time in South Kensington - walking back to hotel at night, only about 30% of houses had any lights on. Suggestion is the others are effectively uninhabited, and a search on RightMove shows properties sell for £20-£30m for a 4/5 bed. This isn't normal Londoners, it's outside investment. 2) Cornwall, where I li…

Has it ever been possible to buy a house on minimum wage?

Yes. I even knew welfare recepients who bought a property while on welfare.

Pepperidge farms remembers.

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#119

Post by bradleyjg »

turbinerneiter wrote: post #35
iamnotwhoiam wrote: post #13

So investors buy the homes then rent them out? What’s the problem? In some asian markets investors buy homes then sit on them unused for years. That’s a problem.

The problem is that it gets harder and harder for normal people to own anything (build up wealth), while building wealth is the best retirement startegy there is. I myself, for example, live in a city where owning the place I live in is just barely getting in reach for me, although I am in the top 30% income bracket of my country. I therefore have to put my savings into the stock market, which is at an all time high.…

The problem is that it gets harder and harder for normal people to own anything ( build up wealth), while building wealth is the best retirement startegy there is.

This is the problem in a nutshell! It’s impossible for houses to continue to be great “wealth building” vehicles and for them be affordable. Politicians have prioritized the former and that’s how we got where we are.

If we want affordable housing for people to live in they can’t also be the universal investment vehicle. Those two objectives are in direct contradiction.

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#120

Post by lotsofpulp »

turbinerneiter wrote: post #88
lotsofpulp wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem is that it gets harder and harder for normal people to own anything (build up wealth), In the US, it is easier than ever. Open a free account online at a number of brokerages, and buy some broad market low cost equity index ETF. The problem is government subsidies for real estate. Get rid of federal taxpayer guaranteed mortgages (Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, ginnie mae). Get rid of 1031 exchanges. Let the m…

It's just that most people would prefer owning a house over owning stocks. Because when the economy tanks and you lose your job, you have to sell your stocks at the low point to make rent. When you own your house, losing your job still sucks, but at least you still have a home. Thats also the reason why the low interest rates, although nice for homebuyers, also aren't a great levy of the situation: I have to pay back…

I do not understand your comment, as it started off sounding like there was a downside of renting vs owning, but then later on in the paragraph, you say that the risks of not being able to pay rent and not being able to pay a mortgage result in the same consequences during an economic downturn.

> Because when the economy tanks and you lose your job, you have to sell your stocks at the low point to make rent.

You should have an emergency fund so that you do not have to sell at the low point. I try to keep at least 24 months of expenses.

In the US, the government also offers a federal taxpayer subsidy in the form of lending people money with no money down or 5% down or some ridiculous scheme advertised as helping lower income people. On the contrary, this simply increases home prices and over leverages them since they will barely make monthly payments and any hiccup will derail them.

Post reply on HN