Earlier quoted context omitted.
Monetary policy and fiat currency are unequivocally good things. Deflation is what caused the 50 year recession from 1860-1910. Not being able to control inflation leads to mass unemployment.
My comment explains in detail the specific mechanism I'm concerned about in a way that everyone can understand it. Your comment regurgitates something from a textbook that people have on reason to actually trust. I don't have a problem that you disagree with me. I have a problem that it's an argument from authority. Also, I wonder if you're conceding that the Fed steals from the economy in general and gives to the su…
How Zillow's homebuying scheme lost $881M
631–640 of 684 posts
Re: How Zillow's homebuying scheme lost $881M
#632Earlier quoted context omitted.
Im genuinely curious to read more on this. Know of a source for that number or some resources I can try to research on the topic? I just mostly see people reaching for conclusions but see very little data to back it up.
All the relevant data is on FRED https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/TTLHH https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/ETOTALUSQ176N https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNDCONTSA Homes actively under construction is about to hit an all time high, higher than the 70s peak Plus consider demographics. Millennial hump has passed avg home buying age, and there are demographic headwinds going forward, unless immigration policy become…
Re: How Zillow's homebuying scheme lost $881M
#633Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Now we just need to build condos that are appropriate for all stages of life -- not just young singlehood and coupledom. Can you share some ideas about what this would look like?
not the original commenter, but I think they said it > we currently build condos but don't build the public spaces that serve to supplement them and make them comfortable for, e.g., families with kids. you need * several bedrooms * some utility space (for things one would have otherwise done in the garage) * nearby [safe] parks and playgrounds * nearby recreation centers * good schools etc
Re: How Zillow's homebuying scheme lost $881M
#634Earlier quoted context omitted.
Single Family homes have the benefit of more autonomy where as building up means you're living on-top of your neighbor, its not binary but we should acknowledge the clear QoL tradeoffs of condensed living. Maybe its inevitable and necessary to force more people into condensed housing, maybe the societal benefits really outweigh the tradeoffs.
> clear QoL tradeoffs of condensed living. and that's why single family homes should be more expensive, because it is better. People continue to bid it up, because they still believe that the price is worth and hasn't reached a ceiling yet. In asian hubs like hong kong or shanghai, they've reached a certain ceiling on land, and so building up is now what most people could buy and so they do that. The cities in countr…
Re: How Zillow's homebuying scheme lost $881M
#635The scary thing is that it's easy to see how something how like this could drive a market boom and bust cycle. I'm imagining a scenario where two iBuyer companies try to outbid each other algorithmically, driving the prices further and further out of reach of people who are looking for a primary home. Tangentially related, I talked to a friend who works on geospatial data for one of the big vacation rental companies,…
Re: How Zillow's homebuying scheme lost $881M
#636Earlier quoted context omitted.
not the original commenter, but I think they said it > we currently build condos but don't build the public spaces that serve to supplement them and make them comfortable for, e.g., families with kids. you need * several bedrooms * some utility space (for things one would have otherwise done in the garage) * nearby [safe] parks and playgrounds * nearby recreation centers * good schools etc
I think those already exist, perhaps beyond the utility space, and they don't seem to cut it. I don't think the utility room is the difference maker. I actually think the neighborhood feeling and sense of space are much more important.
I grew up in an apartment building that absolutely felt like a neighborhood in itself. There were at least 10 other kids in the 400-unit building my own age. In the local neighborhood (consisting of other apartment buildings) there were easily another 30 kids my age, any of whom I could see in a 5-10 minute walk. Few people owned cars (it was NYC after all!) and the area was quite safe traffic-wise.
I spent countless evenings outside walking or biking along promenades, or just hanging out in parks, playgrounds — all literally steps from my apartment building — and as I got older, in libraries, cafes, restaurants, shops, etc. The building I lived in also had a pool and multiple community “rooms” that were several thousand sqft large, which we reserved for birthday parties and other events.
It was fantastic. There were kids there because the spaces were designed to support families, and the “must have SFH with yard before having kids” attitude among the middle and upper-middle class is pretty weak in NYC, so my neighbors could be similarly-high SES because not all parents immediately flee apartment living for the suburbs.
Today, I live in a Bay Area inner suburb. There are, again, 10 kids my preschooler’s age in the local (couple blocks) neighborhood. But they can’t bike alone (or even walk alone, really) because drivers often hit 50mph and don’t look where they’re going. Each of our back yards — though we have one! — is tiny, much smaller than the community rooms I had growing up, so for any serious physical activity we have to get in the car to drive somewhere, contributing to the “traffic is a problem” problem.
The closest public park is a 4000-square-foot grass triangle in a quiet almost-cul-de-sac that takes 10 minutes to walk to and 30 seconds to walk across. There is a library 5 minutes’ walk away, and it is a saving grace.
If I could transplant the apartment building I grew up in to my local neighborhood, which is about 2 miles square — 100 million sqft — its 16000 residents could be housed in about 16 buildings, each of which would have a 25,000 sqft footprint, totaling 400,000 sqft and leaving 99.6 million square feet for fantastic parks, promenades, playgrounds, schools, trails, open space, basically any use you could imagine. Each apartment could be owned, 2000+ sqft, with private decks/patios/balconies and wonderful views.
If that were available in the Bay Area…we could build them at 2x the density described above and house the next 20 years of newcomers…
Re: How Zillow's homebuying scheme lost $881M
#637Earlier quoted context omitted.
> landlords don't actually produce land or provide housing of course they do - they provide it by being part of the capital flow, which starts at construction. It might not be the same person, but it's a chain of financing that lead to the landlord purchasing the property. Superior resources is just another name for capital. And you need capital to fund the construction. The landlord is just the last chain on this fu…
Man, I'm not saying you're completely wrong, but that's such a ridiculous stretch I bought a few shares of Pfizer, does that make me a healthcare provider?
I'm just trying to correct the mistaken view that providing capital is tantamount to doing nothing.
Re: How Zillow's homebuying scheme lost $881M
#638Earlier quoted context omitted.
You'd be surprised. SF Rent Board will always seek the solution that keeps the tenant in their home. So a tenant might stop paying rent, a few months later you get an eviction hearing, but then the tenant pays the rent this month and promises to pay the back rent . Your eviction has just been denied. Tenant falls back on rent again, but made a good faith effort to pay some of the back rent. Eviction denied. Finally,…
Honestly, that sounds great. The risk of being a rentier should be higher than the risk of an index tracker. A lot of our problems can be traced to the fact that bricks and mortar are seen as a better RoI than stocks and shares, and one way to fix that is to change the risk profile of being a landlord by increasing tenants' rights.
Re: How Zillow's homebuying scheme lost $881M
#639Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That would have fixed much of this, it's point blank illegal to run a bed and breakfast out of your home. Why? It's your home, you can do anything in it. Why should you need a license to rent out your own home for a few days? Does it physically destroy neighborhoods or just your perception of it? If so, why should anyone care?
Might as well eschew all zoning laws and turn your home into a junkyard or a industrial manufacturing facility by the same rationale: it is your home, after all.
Re: How Zillow's homebuying scheme lost $881M
#640Earlier quoted context omitted.
Legislating morality has been an utter failure. And here you advocating for legislating not morality but your own personal feelings and experiences. I take an issue with the entitlement that other people should change their behavior to protect your housing prices
I disagree it has been an utter failure, first exmaple that comes to mind is lack of affordable health care in US compared to most western countries, and other less "controversial" examples: child labor and minimum age for marriage. And no I'm not advocating for anything based on my own personal feelings, but if something is deemed as harmful to society, yes perhaps we need to pass legislation to minimize it. But als…