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

301–310 of 598 posts

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

#301

Post by em500 »

pigeonhole123 wrote: post #284
em500 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wouldn't be, if it did that. Fortunately it doesn't ignore those. In the US CPI calculation, housing has around 42% weight, medical care around 9%. Source: https://www.bls.gov/cpi/tables/relative-importance/2020.htm

I think this is only rent? Most people don’t want to rent their whole life in the US https://www.bls.gov/cpi/factsheets/owners-equivalent-rent-an...

It uses actual rents for renters and owner-equivalent rents for owners. This does not assume at all that people want to rent their whole life. (The main assumption it relies on is that owners do not systematically understate what they think their own house could be rented for.)

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

#302

Post by TacticalCoder »

734129837261 wrote: post #191
rusteh1 wrote: post #165

I don't understand how this would work. How do people rent? Obviously many people can't or do not wish to own their house for any number of reasons. Who will own houses that are rented? I used to live in Amsterdam as an expat, and rented from a landlord who owned several homes in Amsterdam. Would she not be able to own and rent these homes under this scheme? The social housing system seemed to be abused when I was th…

Designations. That's how. Some houses are built and intended to be rented out to people. These houses are constructed entirely by companies (or people) for that purpose alone. Other houses are meant to be for purchase, and purchase only. If you purchase a house like this and then rent it out, that should be considered breaking the intended designation. So if you as an individual want to own multiple houses to rent ou…

> These houses are constructed entirely by companies (or people) for that purpose alone.

So private companies are allowed to engage in rent-seeking behavior but individuals aren't?

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

#303

Post by arp242 »

lostlogin wrote: post #9
57844743385 wrote: post #6

The only way to make housing affordable is to end property investing.

New Zealand had a stock market crash in the ’80s which is frequently blamed for the aversion New Zealanders have to shares and the love of property investment. We have a truely terrible housing stock (cold, damp and poorly maintained) and in the largest city, Auckland, the average house price is 20x the average wage. People claim it’s untenable but the rise in values has been utterly relentless.

When I lived in Dunedin a few years ago I was truly shocked at the state of the houses. I don't think I've ever seen a house in the Netherlands without central heating; but I've never seen a house with central heating in Dunedin, and Dunedin is quite a bit colder than the Netherlands. Isolation and even double glazing seems almost non-existent and wooden houses are the norm.

Don't get me wrong, I really loved living there, and I'd move back in an instant (but work visas are very hard at the moment), but Kiwi houses are the worst and many decades behind Europe.

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

#304

Post by R0b0t1 »

taffer wrote: post #260
R0b0t1 wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> To avoid paying the LVT tenants are incentivized to own LVT is paid by the owner of the land. That is the whole point of a LVT, that you cannot avoid it.

On paper, yes, but it'll just get passed on to the renter.

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

#305

Post by kingludite »

refurb wrote: post #201
itsdsmurrell wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The bank is collect money in the future that is worth less than what they leant out today - time value of money. Charging 0% interest means the bank is losing money.

I don't get how people can keep saying this. Is it that people are told banks lend out money from depositors in school?

Anyway, if you sign a contract that says you shall pay me every month for 30 years OR ELSE I get to sell your house (and whatever else you own, seize your income etc) then the document with your signature IS the value created and I can sell that document for what it is worth.

So the bank creates money not entirely out of thin air but against this contract.

This is a fantastic deal for them as there is almost no risk.

The seemingly few percent interest per year over 30 years quickly ads up to 2 or 3 times the initial sum.

I suppose this would be a reasonable amount roughly around the point where 3 out of 4 houses and the ground under them would just vanish in thin air with their owner stopping all payments after about 5 years on average.

The reality was that some people still had to pay rent for their flooded home.

So we are all suckers for putting up with the scheme, welcome to the club.

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

#306

Post by ralfn »

I'm slightly annoyed with all the UK examples. This is about the Netherlands.

The Dutch housing bubble consists of 4 factors:

- interest rate on mortgages has been tax deductible

- new developments are limited due to environmental considerations

- it's the safest "on the books" wealth storage in all of Europe (it has been a good investment since the 16th century)

- the Netherlands outclasses it's direct neighbours in quality of life and urbanisation. It's #1 best location in the world to raise children. This leads to many many people wanting to move to the Netherlands. They are not coming for the jobs or our great personalities (sarcasm) they come for the nice living conditions, the great bicycle and public transit infrastructure. The great roads. The good education. The livability of our towns and cities. And we can't really scale it up further. It's all of the country already. You can be in the middle of nowhere in Frisia and jump on a lightrail or see a proper safe bike detour due to some new construction. From small suburbia to big inner cities. We really need Germany, Belgium and Denmark to step their game up. Release some of the pressure. (PS. Denmark is actually stepping up and will get there soon)

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

#307

Post by eloff »

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.

I've wondered lately, since the government backstops both banks and mortgages, shouldn't it just cut out the middleman? It could either give cheaper mortgages or use the difference as tax revenue.

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

#308

Post by redis_mlc »

ForHackernews wrote: post #130
makomk wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, the British press and all the wealthy people with second homes still have Brexit as a scapegoat for why cafes and shops in tourist destinations can't find staff. Never mind the fact that AirBNB and second homes have pushed up house prices and rents to the point that it's impossible to live there on the kind of pay those jobs have, according to the media it's all the fault of Brexit driving away the for…

That's a self-correcting problem, isn't it? Either those cafes and shops will raise prices and pay their staff more, or they'll close down. I've never understood why we're supposed to feel bad for "small business owners" who won't find staff when paying peanuts for their crappy jobs.

oh, the newb HN Econ 101 argument again.

> we're supposed to feel bad for "small business owners"

Yes, you should.

What will happen is this. When their commercial lease comes up for renewal, the small business owner won't renew. Then you'll write even more idiotic posts like, "Why's there no entertainment venues in the area?"

HN is so out-of-touch with businesses on the other side of the keyboard.

Here's a clue, Marxist. As corona recedes, the news will start reporting on the craggy shoals of bk's and suicidal small business owners that surface. You know, the people you have no empathy for, but make up the character of a city.

You can watch Louis Rossman's Youtube channel on how retailers have abandoned the most prime New York locations in the world to see how it plays out.

"Madison Ave. is 39% empty"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfHQZj3_TX4

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

#309

Post by sideshowb »

laurent92 wrote: post #266
nkrisc wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>it's all the fault of Brexit driving away the foreign workers who had to do the jobs Forgive me since I’m American, but wasn’t getting rid of foreigners taking jobs one of the selling points of Brexit?

No, it was recovering the freedom that was getting eaten by Europe, and listening to the vote of the UK people again. Whether it ends up in “getting rid of foreigners” or anything else would only be a second-order result of listening to the Englishman’s vote, if that is what they still vote for in 10 years. The goal of Brexit was democracy, not particular measures left or right.

Amusing you equate democracy with the English vote. Sincerely, Scotland, Wales and NI

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

#310

Post by kingludite »

chrisseaton wrote: post #213
lsiebert wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

That’d have to be a £60k house.

40 years ago some family homes in NL cost 35 k guilders or 16 k euro. 2 floors, 2 bedrooms, front and back yard.
Post reply on HN