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

171–180 of 598 posts

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

#171

Post by cutler »

varjag wrote: post #126
toomanybeersies wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I moved here years ago and was having doubts if it's the right time to buy at these insane property prices. A coworker said "I know some people who've been holding out for fair housing prices since 1949, they are still waiting".

Anyone remember Fair Rent tribunals in the UK? Abolished by the Conservatives in the late 80s along with higher education grants. The 70s and early 80s were a golden age for more than just music.

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

#172

Post by R0b0t1 »

simonh wrote: post #144
murgindrag wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I don’t think the article is saying ownership is a bad thing in itself, but that the vast resources that have been poured into promoting and subsidising it have had some pretty undesirable consequences. Here in the UK we have started imposing tax penalties on buy to rent that disincentivizes owning more than one or two rental properties. The problem with punishing institutional investors is it would take huge amounts…

Home prices are up because there is no supply. There's no supply because people can't afford to build houses. The issue isn't home ownership, it's the lack of it.

An LVT might work but I think it is only ethical if you advantage primary residences with a complete lack of tax.

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

#173

Post by Flashtoo »

keewee7 wrote: post #80
turbinerneiter wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 One of the reasons is that people insist on living and working in some of the wealthiest and most expensive cities in the world. I live a cheap town and my commute to work in the 2nd biggest city in my country is just 25 minutes.

You are assuming that it is possible to live cheaply within 25 minutes of a big city in The Netherlands. That's not the case.

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

#174

Post by taffer »

thepangolino wrote: post #111
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.

On the contrary, a land value tax is often proposed to discourage sprawl. Since a land value tax is the same whether you leave a lot vacant or build a single family home or a multi family home, it encourages density and leads to less sprawl.

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

#175

Post by bsksi »

maccolgan wrote: post #129
bsksi wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know they exist. What I'm saying is that European cities are built around the idea of people being able to live in walking distance of... Everything. Suburbs here exist for snobs and assholes.

Who are you speaking on behalf of?

Like everybody else who posts comments on the internet, myself. Did I give the impression I was speaking on behalf of someone else?

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

#176

Post by R0b0t1 »

lifty wrote: post #114
saulpw wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I like it too, but it seems to incentivize sprawl. If people attempt to lease land the LVT will be passed to their tenants. To avoid paying the LVT, tenants will look for new construction.

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

#177

Post by R0b0t1 »

pydry wrote: post #153
thepangolino wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It would probably encourage less urban sprawl by driving more efficient use of city center land and housing.

It depends. If owned land is converted for rent then the LVT is passed on to the tenant. To avoid paying the LVT tenants are incentivized to own, which may imply buying new construction.

As population density increases, desirability increases, and people may try investing with the goal of renting, which with an LVT will more sharply decrease the desirability of population density.

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

#178

Post by the-dude »

varjag wrote: post #34
cjfd wrote: post #19

This is cart before horse stuff. As noticed by other commenters some people need to rent. I am blaming 'quantitative easing'. If the central bank buys a whole lot of assets where do other investors go?

I believe the Netherlands used to allow full tax write-off of the mortgage interest (dunno if they still do). That certainly is bound to heat up the market.

I am not sure 'full write-off' is the correct term.

It is tax deductable, so you are taxed less, typically max 50% of the interest sum.

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

#179

Post by himlion »

itsdsmurrell wrote: post #160
iso1210 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Round here in Cornwall the jobs are things like surf instructor, supermarket worker, barperson, etc. That's not gonna stretch to the local house prices. That was the case. A colleague of mine, originally from St Just, moved to London for work as so many have to do. Another from near Cockermouth did the same. Both now work remotely full time from their 'home towns' on decent wages. Covid has done wonders for local c…

The real problem is how much the bank earns off the interest it charges you throughout your life while it had to do what?... create new money from nothing into the money supply with special permissions given to it by the government. This is why housing is so expensive to begin with. This bullshit needs to stop.

That's a concern after more pressing issues are solved.

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

#180

Post by rtpg »

csomar wrote: post #46
anothernewdude wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those empty homes should be torn down or squatted in. I imagine an organisation like a squatters union could be set up to manage protection for them.

Sure. Let's fix a housing crisis by completely breaking up laws, society and order.

Let’s fix a housing crisis by having houses be used.

I doubt this is the magical unique problem everyone claims it is, but “oh no think of people’s investment” when people are sleeping outside is valuing property over people.

Post reply on HN