Live data from Hacker News

Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

nltimes.nl

471–480 of 598 posts

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

#471
post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If prices were going down would things be better? You bought a 500,000 and in ten years it will be worth 100,000 would you still make that investment? Everyone wants prices to remain the same forever. That takes a neutral population growth or more supply

>investment That's exactly the problem right there. A house can be a place to live or an investment, but not both. I myself think it's a bit to silly to spend labour and resources building a concrete box for the latter purpose, so I'd much rather houses fulfill their purpose as homes for people to live in.

> but not both

Certainly a place to live can also be an investment.

Just like a work of art can also be an investment.

And a plumbing business can be an investment and also fix your pipes.

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

#472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We’re in a suicide spiral where fiscal policy has staved off economic malaise by kicking the can down the road. Interest rates have been kept low, which drives real property prices up. Everyone intuitively knows that collapse or high inflation is the endgame, so money flocks to property, which drives up demand. The issue isn’t the coffee shop in the fishing village, it’s that the fishermen are selling real estate now…

Low interest rates have made everything cheap but the supply of housing (specifically land) is extremely inflexible. You can make more cars but not land. The location value of your house skyrockets at the expense of everyone else. However, make no mistake. The problem isn't money. Even if you buy your house with Bitcoin you will run into the same problem. The problem is that location is a a monopoly. You can tax it o…

> You can make more cars but not land.

Lots of land exists, the issue is desirable cities, and western countries have gotten really bad at making those.

China spent the first decade of the 21st century creating urban cities left and right, ignore the western propaganda of "ghost cities", and also spent time urbanizing what America would consider "suburban" towns.

Meanwhile western nations are dead set on never increasing the # of desirable urban environments, and then it is all surprise Pikachu when house prices skyrocket.

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

#473
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.

[deleted]

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

#474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Low interest rates have made everything cheap but the supply of housing (specifically land) is extremely inflexible. You can make more cars but not land. The location value of your house skyrockets at the expense of everyone else. However, make no mistake. The problem isn't money. Even if you buy your house with Bitcoin you will run into the same problem. The problem is that location is a a monopoly. You can tax it o…

I’m not making any mistake, cheap money is absolutely the biggest problem that we have today. My former mentor bought a house on Nantucket for $150k in 1990, sold for $3.5M earlier this year. That appreciation isn’t due to inflation or the constrained supply of homes — it’s always been constrained. It’s due to increased demand fueled by excess capital. There’s no money in traditional banking. Even with negligible int…

> My former mentor bought a house on Nantucket for $150k in 1990, sold for $3.5M earlier this year.

That is literally a luxury good with a fixed supply. As the # of people who desire that good has sky rocketed generation to generation, of course the price went up.

There are limited production run cars from that era that underwent similar price inflation.

For someone who wants to live in Nantucket, there is literally no substitutable good!

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

#475

What's the deal with landlord hate? If I buy a lawnmower, pool, or whatever else and rent it out you all are ok with that. If I buy a house and rent it out suddenly I'm an "enemy of the people".

Most leftists are driven by envy; they see someone else has something they can't afford, and they feel rage. They can't afford multiple houses, so seeing people with multiple houses triggers this feeling. Fundamentally it's because they're so ego-driven they can't accept the market rewards people fairly, because doing so would require accepting that someone else deserves those houses more than they do.

I want to become a landlords and I do not want to think about the moral implications of rent seeking. If the government simply taxed the unfair gains I received through rent seeking then I would have no moral qualms about other landlords. I would be very happy to pay land value taxes if that is what it takes to make free market capitalism fair again.

I do not envy Jeff Bezoz for owning $200 billion in stocks. I do not envy Bill Gates for owning Microsoft. I consider Bill Gates accumulating farmland without paying a tax to compensate for his monopoly rights to be a form of extortion that should not be allowed.

>Most leftists are driven by envy; they see someone else has something they can't afford, and they feel rage.

I don't.

> They can't afford multiple houses, so seeing people with multiple houses triggers this feeling.

I am always in favor of a land value tax that taxes home owners and large scale investors at the same rate. The reason why I have to make a concession to primary residences is that home owners would vote against the tax and the land value tax wouldn't be introduced at all.

>Fundamentally it's because they're so ego-driven they can't accept the market rewards people fairly,

How can abusing the monopoly of location be considered a fair reward? You are distorting the market.

> because doing so would require accepting that someone else deserves those houses more than they do.

No, it's the opposite. You can buy the land 30 years ago and let the property on top sit vacant and still net a return because the value of the land has risen. Such an investor made a lot of money without deserving the land at all. If land had a holding fee then only those who can extract the most value out of the land would seek it out.

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

#476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>investment That's exactly the problem right there. A house can be a place to live or an investment, but not both. I myself think it's a bit to silly to spend labour and resources building a concrete box for the latter purpose, so I'd much rather houses fulfill their purpose as homes for people to live in.

> but not both Certainly a place to live can also be an investment. Just like a work of art can also be an investment. And a plumbing business can be an investment and also fix your pipes.

You missed the point - a plumbing business is an investment, just like a construction business. But no-one buys an old set of pipes and calls that an investment, and we understand that would be dumb.

If houses are to be an investment, their prices will keep rising and they become unaffordable. When consumer goods themselves are an investment, standards of living fall

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

#477
post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another Cornishman here (Par). The financial destitution and how much harder they have to work for the same things I do in the South East is unsustainable. Cornwall has Luther to the right politically and that’s because there’s been some useful scapegoats. Now those scapegoats have been slain and things are getting worse not better I hope we’ll see policies that are focused on root cause issues instead of ideology (l…

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…

There's a dead comment later in this thread which using directed abusive language towards another commenter while linking to a Louis Rossmann video.

The video [1] was interesting, although the dead comment seemed to completely ignore the video's [1] main point, where Louis talks about a hypothesis [2] where in New York City there may be an incentive structure between real estate investors and banks which is creating a market failure. The hypothesis [2] is that a building's assessed value is based on the rental prices that the landlord asks for even if nobody will reasonably pay those rents. The hypothesis speculates that, if a building's assessed value is lowered, it could trigger conditions in loan contracts that penalize the landlord or investor. Because of this, there may be an incentive for the landlord to keep buildings vacant instead of lowering their prices to market rate.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfHQZj3_TX4&t=580s

[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/nyc/comments/innhah/nearly_twothird...

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

#478
post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the explanation I had from a local back in 2003. He said their whole interest part of the mortgage was eligible for tax rebate.

Still the case for PPOR, 30 years max, no interest-only mortages.

Not 50% anymore, the max deductible rate is now 43% and in 2023 it'll be 37% at which point there won't be anymore scheduled reductions. (but I'd be surprised if further reductions won't be announced the coming years).

It can be a misleading to say this means only 50% or 37% of your interest can be deducted. It could still be fully deducted. i.e. if your income is taxed at 37% rate, then the 37% rate of 2023 will mean your entire interest can be deducted from your income (100% interest deduction).

It means that at higher progressive tax rates for higher incomes, e.g. at 50%, only 37% of the 50% can be deducted.

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

#479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All the apartments in and around me are all the time rented out as airbnb. During peak of pandemic, it was pretty much a ghost town. What you mention around Airbnb shouldn't be addressed through a buy-to-let ban, but an airbnb or short-term rental ban, which already exists in various forms. If there's problems with enforcement, address that. The ghost-town you described happened regardless of airbnb but due to lite…

> Airbnb shouldn't be addressed through a buy-to-let ban, but an airbnb or short-term rental ban, which already exists in various forms Airbnb is probably paying off various government officials around the world to make sure the laws are friendly to them.

Well, I'm sure this is true for every industry. Nonetheless, in the Netherlands the law is 30 days per year max, that law has been around for years, and penalties are heavy. The Amsterdam municipality is laserfocussed on enforcement (which is difficult) and has been making plenty of headway.

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

#480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since houses don’t wear out or get used up, like clothes or food, and you can sell them when you’re done with them, they’re inherently an investment.

They do. It's the land that goes up in value.

Houses get more valuable the older they are. Most people don't want new houses.
Post reply on HN