101–110 of 235 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or just move to a shitty area that is cheaper, plenty of those around.
It won't make the areas better in any meaningful sense.
You’d be surprised at how some of the most desirable neighborhoods in SF were once “crappy” only 20 years ago.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don’t “need” any of that.
You don't "need" very much of anything. People get by with a 100-200sqft room shared with other people, but that doesn't mean it's what I would want to live in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot of people place misdirected blame for unaffordable housing on themselves or others who buy, fix up, and rent out houses. It's pretty obvious that the cause of unaffordable housing is elsewhere. But being the one to actually collect rent is a kind of guilt-by-association.
I mean, sure. At the end of the day all land owners, and I speak as one, exist at the end of a chain that began with theft and likely violence. The surface of the earth is by nature no less a resource that should be common to all man as the atmosphere and the oceans. Neither the landlord with more than he can live on nor the renter with not enough to live on can exist without someone at some point having taken more t…
>I lived in an illegal rental to save up for a home, then decided to buy out-of-state properties and drive up the rent. I'm aware of how this will be perceived, but I want to feel good about myself despite knowing how what I'm doing hurts others. lol
“We are renting to willing tenants at the fair market price.”
Landlord’s cant “drive up the rent” any more than employees can be unfairly paid too much.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The reason housing increases in value to the extent that it does is that areas where it's in high demand prohibit creating more of it. It would be like prohibiting the construction of new cars. Obviously that would make existing cars cost more in general, independent of the fact that some cars are worth more than others. Yes, and the areas that are desirable and the ones that are restricting the construction. Even…
You're the one ignoring reality. In your defense, basically every clueless voter living in the US and a lot of Europe does it too, though. In Tokyo, you can work part time as a non-union, non-salaried janitor or a nail stylist and make enough to live within 20 minutes of the bustling heart of downtown. That's due to light zoning restrictions making housing into a depreciating asset for everybody instead of a stupid f…
It's a corrupt, poorly regulated market that suits the construction industry and produces - on the whole - ugly, poorly insulated and tiny living spaces, surrounded by concrete (again, the amount of concrete used seems to be driven by corruption) that leads to overpriced land and buildings that depreciate so much that they are destroyed within one or two generations.
A quick search of this site alone will bring you reams of complaints about Japanese housing and plenty of good reasons why it should not be held up as an exemplar.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, don’t the people who live in a place have the right to decide they don’t want to invite in population until their homes are turned into a megacity? And if people don’t like the prevailing political opinions of a place that doesn’t want to change its nature to suit them, aren’t there plenty of other places to go? The market its screwed up in the Bay Area because they in way more jobs than they wanted to let in…
No, they don't. Ifbyou want control over who can move in somewhere, or what can be built somewhere, you have a simple solution, buy the land in question.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, don’t the people who live in a place have the right to decide they don’t want to invite in population until their homes are turned into a megacity? And if people don’t like the prevailing political opinions of a place that doesn’t want to change its nature to suit them, aren’t there plenty of other places to go? The market its screwed up in the Bay Area because they in way more jobs than they wanted to let in…
No, they don't. Ifbyou want control over who can move in somewhere, or what can be built somewhere, you have a simple solution, buy the land in question.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, they don't. Ifbyou want control over who can move in somewhere, or what can be built somewhere, you have a simple solution, buy the land in question.
People who rent also have voting rights for electing local governments in many places in the world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He did that on the backs of those trying to get into the housing market now.
On their backs? He bought property on the market, and put it to economic use. He made rental property available in an area where many people can't afford to buy. He hasn't done anyone down.