Your sentiment is valid, but I don't think anyone in this thread knows what the word "commoditization" means.
Ask HN: Anyone else feels the commoditization of real estate is unethical?
171–180 of 764 posts
Re: Ask HN: Anyone else feels the commoditization of real estate is unethical?
#172Like another comment here mentioned, housing is complicated. People don't want to live in a random house in the middle of nowhere ('roof over your head'). Some people prefer to be homeless on the street versus getting to a roof over their head that they don't like.
People want to live where they want to live (near family, jobs, culture etc)
Take NYC for instance. Politicians try to address the NYC housing crisis from a demand/cost perspective. Rent is too high? Let's just screw the property owner and cap the rent. Or let's just raise minimum wage to make it easier for people to live in those properties.
The result in both cases: you didn't have enough housing before, you don't have enough housing now. You give more money to people, rents will just go up. You cap the rent, there's still a huge number of people that can't live where they want and you make it impossible for existing tenants to move (or for new/more development to be built, for that matter)
So, what instead? You want to build more housing in NYC? Great, that should work. But you have to make it cheap. Deregulate construction, get rid of unions, prioritize developer rights over tenant or homeowner rights. What? You don't think these are good things? Okay, but then you'll have to sit back and watch new construction trickle in and result in 'luxury' housing because that's the only way a developer can recoup their enormous land acquisition, regulation and construction costs. So the challenge with housing is that it requires fundamentally difficult decisions. To pretend that you can just spend 100 billion (or even a trillion) and the problem will be solved and people will be happy, is an illusion.
Re: Ask HN: Anyone else feels the commoditization of real estate is unethical?
#173I think this is blatantly unethical, but also stupid. By creating a speculative bubble fueled by low interest and moderate to high inflation, these people will put themselves upside down in their holdings. Meanwhile this drives up homelessness (plenty of tent cities popped up near me as rents and housing prices skyrocketed) which will drive political instability and increase crime as people become desperate. Edit: on…
I agree about the housing speculation, but I challenge the (oft-repeated) assertion that this has caused homelessness. If you could afford to pay SOME rent in an area that got more expensive, then you can move to a less-expensive area and pay the same rent.
Who's paying for the move? How does the move affect commutes and how close is the new dwelling to essential services?
If you were already in the lowest priced area and that became too expensive, where do you go?
Re: Ask HN: Anyone else feels the commoditization of real estate is unethical?
#174Folks talking about housing tend to only consider the list price when deciding if it's too expensive.
Far more interesting to consider, I think, is there cost per square foot to construct; which has skyrocketed in a few generations.
Dimensional lumber and other materials just cost more. Labour is compensated better. And yes, fees have gone way up in many municipalities.
Re: Ask HN: Anyone else feels the commoditization of real estate is unethical?
#175> basic human right to have a roof over one's head Is that a basic human right? If you build your roof, are you then required to share it with others? Why can't they build their own? Why should you build one if someone else already has? Starting with that assumption severely limits the conclusions you can come to, doesn't it?
If not housing, what do you consider to be the set basic human rights?
Re: Ask HN: Anyone else feels the commoditization of real estate is unethical?
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
What valuable service do landlords provide, exactly? It's my understanding that barring regulatory requirements for standards of living, at their core a landlord is providing access to previously un-utilized monopolized space. That's not really a valuable service, in my mind; maybe it is in the way that 'we'll give you protection from ourselves coming back and breaking your windows' is a valuable service.
See my comment below to a similar concern. There are as many different kinds of landlords as there are people. The value the good ones bring are cared for, affordable places for people to live who prefer to not own a home. Repairing, maintaining, improving, insuring, all take a lot of costs and risks. The government does provide public land in which people can live for free. Why isn't that more popular?
House repair and maintenance is not really what a landlord does, though - they rent land. Perhaps as an added feature they can offer services like repairs and maintenance, but that is not inherent to the "job" of landlord.
Re: Ask HN: Anyone else feels the commoditization of real estate is unethical?
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Imagine if we did the same thing with, say, water: privatized it and then "democratized" ownership of it. We're watching this happen before our eyes.
In most of the UK (England and Wales), water was privitised in 1989 General consensus even amongst the right-wing media and the media that aims to appeal to conservative voters [1-4] seems to be is that we have drought and hosepipe bans while the private companies pay out £1b dividends and it's not right. [1] https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/54e5542a-1a6b-11ed-b1f4-6... [2] https://www.guardian-series.co.uk/news/20…
Showing my age, but back in 1976, where I lived, water was being brought in by tanker day and night during the hottest summer on record.
I'm not saying privatisation has been a glowing success but supply issues were much worse in the days of nationalisation, especially when you factor in the population growth over the past few decades.
Re: Ask HN: Anyone else feels the commoditization of real estate is unethical?
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's something that turns a basic necessity into a speculative asset I see some broad parallels in this line of rhetoric to "Zeus brings misfortune because people are impious vs good fortune when they are worthy". It presumes a difference and a drive that is not there. All assets are both speculative and non-speculative at all times. There are no assets that cannot be bought speculatively and a house is always goin…
> There are problems in the housing market, but they are not to be found by worrying about people acting speculatively. People are responding to the real problem, whatever it is We should do both. Build more housing and crack down on speculators.
no, you should crack down on government making housing rare, which is who is at fault in pretty much all of North America. Zoning is mismatched to the task of housing the people who want to live in many areas and local governments need to drastically increase the higher density zoned areas and that is pretty much the extent of the problem and the solution.
Re: Ask HN: Anyone else feels the commoditization of real estate is unethical?
#179I definitely do. It's something that turns a basic necessity into a speculative asset, with a price distorted by the money poured into it. Airbnb is also a deeply harmful influence on housing prices. Imagine if we did the same thing with, say, water: privatized it and then "democratized" ownership of it. It's easy to get retail investors to buy things at inflated, speculative prices, so the price of water would go up…
> Imagine if we did the same thing with, say, water
Hm, maybe we can do the same thing with Air. We can even keep the same name, Airbnb, but this time people are paying for the best air.
Re: Ask HN: Anyone else feels the commoditization of real estate is unethical?
#180I definitely do. It's something that turns a basic necessity into a speculative asset, with a price distorted by the money poured into it. Airbnb is also a deeply harmful influence on housing prices. Imagine if we did the same thing with, say, water: privatized it and then "democratized" ownership of it. It's easy to get retail investors to buy things at inflated, speculative prices, so the price of water would go up…
I have long supported the privatization and commiditization of water. It should be sold on the basis of supply and demand with markets, futures, and so forth. Don't like almond farms, bottled water companies pumping millions of gallons for the price of a $200 permit, and golf courses watering their courses during a drought? Then you should too.
Why?