Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Anyone else feels the commoditization of real estate is unethical?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 764 posts

Re: Ask HN: Anyone else feels the commoditization of real estate is unethical?

#331

Post by jefftk »

_8j50 wrote: post #321
rib3ye wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incentivizing individual home ownership I get, but killing the home flipping market, I don’t. Personality, I don’t want to renovate an out of date home, I just want to move in and done with it. Taxing flippers to death doesn’t seem progressive to me.

That's the first argument I usually get as well. I am very much saying end flipping. I don't know what is progressive about that at all. But to be practical, perhaps loosening the profit tax based on how long you owned it makes sense. Perhaps 1% for every year owned? That way you can flip it, live in it 20 years and sell it with inflation adjusted 20% profit?

That's not what people usually mean by flipping, and doesn't address your parent's point. They want to be able to buy property in good condition, and flippers are providing a useful service of increasing the supply of housing good condition.

(I would actually like us to deregulate housing construction past the point where flipping is no longer economic.)

Re: Ask HN: Anyone else feels the commoditization of real estate is unethical?

#332

Post by DAVer98 »

_8j50 wrote: post #201

Unethical? Should be disallowed period. I do strongly believe that once a propery is yours what you do with it is your concern and nobody else's. However, the business practice of purchasing properties to profit from selling it again in the future should not be allowed. So, what should happen is the government should not allow the transfer of ownership when the seller has a) multiple properties and b) is selling a pr…

You are all for the things that can profit you i guess would be the gist of it. Let me guess you're a family man with spawn as well and these are all you care about.

Re: Ask HN: Anyone else feels the commoditization of real estate is unethical?

#333

Post by ItsMonkk »

nrmitchi wrote: post #276
rojobuffalo wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would start by making property taxes substantially higher for non-owner-occupied property. If you are rent-seeking rather than residing on the property you should pay way more, maybe 4x or higher, in taxes. Housing prices would crash and that would be the point; but everyone who owns property would be against it because they don't want to see their assets drop in value. The counter-argument people make is "that wou…

The biggest thing missed when proposals like that is that not everyone wants to (or does it make sense to) buy a property. Making it 4x more expensive to own a rental property means that rent will be 4x more expensive for those that have to rent. If I was moving to NYC for 6 months, or 2 years, there’s no way I want to spend tens of thousands of dollars buying-and-then-selling a property.

Not true, but I'm a Georgist so would be against the GP's targeting non-owner tax. Tax everyone according to the value of the unimproved value of their land.

I can show you plenty of places with $3k+ rents in SF with prop 13 property taxes that have not changed their tax meaningfully in decades. Taxes have absolutely no effect on what the renter pays. The tenant is always paying the land value. It's just going straight to the landlord if you don't have a land value tax, and it goes to society if you do. If you are going to buy a valuable property, why do you need to pay twice[0]?

If you adjust the land tax such that it equals the accruing land value, the price of land becomes zero. The local government can then use that tax money to do all sorts of things[1]. They can also use that as a way to reduce other taxes. Get rid of sales and income taxes. The Henry George Theorem states that a land tax should be able to solely fund governmental services. After all, all taxes come out of rents, so if you tax income, then that disincentives work, so you get less work. If you tax buildings, you get less buildings. If you tax land, there's always a set amount, so there is no harmful effects.

[0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxvXzM1mBWo

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVMGzkSgGXI

Re: Ask HN: Anyone else feels the commoditization of real estate is unethical?

#334

Post by yread »

rojobuffalo wrote: post #257
targ65 wrote: post #172

Like 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…

I would start by making property taxes substantially higher for non-owner-occupied property. If you are rent-seeking rather than residing on the property you should pay way more, maybe 4x or higher, in taxes. Housing prices would crash and that would be the point; but everyone who owns property would be against it because they don't want to see their assets drop in value. The counter-argument people make is "that wou…

There is a 10% tax when buying a house for renting (ie each house after the first one) in the Netherlands. It did stop some people from thinking of buying a house (like my wife) but there is still a huge shortage (and speculation/investment) so it didn't solve the problem. OTOH comparable per meter prices are way lower than London or Frankfurt

Re: Ask HN: Anyone else feels the commoditization of real estate is unethical?

#335

Post by mnd999 »

targ65 wrote: post #172

Like 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…

> Deregulate construction, get rid of unions, prioritize developer rights over tenant or homeowner rights.

That’s how you build slums. Which I think is what you’re proposing.

Re: Ask HN: Anyone else feels the commoditization of real estate is unethical?

#336

Post by DAVer98 »

snapplebobapple wrote: post #156

It's a natural first impulse, but it's wrong. What is the correct impulse is to be concerned about how lopsided most cities zoning is towards single family, as that is what is driving the market power that makes real estate profitable as a financial asset. If most of a city was zoned to allow up to multi residential highrises rather than most of a city being zoned for single family it would cut the appreciation abili…

If people want to have families they should have to move out to the country side and build a family home. Apartments and single person residencies should be the only units allowed to be built in cities where young people have to work and try to build wealth.

Re: Ask HN: Anyone else feels the commoditization of real estate is unethical?

#337

Post by BlargMcLarg »

_8j50 wrote: post #201

Unethical? Should be disallowed period. I do strongly believe that once a propery is yours what you do with it is your concern and nobody else's. However, the business practice of purchasing properties to profit from selling it again in the future should not be allowed. So, what should happen is the government should not allow the transfer of ownership when the seller has a) multiple properties and b) is selling a pr…

>I do strongly believe that once a propery is yours what you do with it is your concern and nobody else's

Not enough. That's how you get a voter base which pushes for plans which make properties more expensive, deprioritizes building and depending on other variables, causes population growth while telling the next generations to just deal with the smaller piece of the pie they have to share with a bigger population than before. That mentality effectively means you're dependent on home owners as a whole to care enough about others to prioritize their needs. Historically, this hasn't been true for almost a century in the majority of the developed world.

That's also why this problem is so difficult to tackle. We don't have a critical mass of individuals democratically yet, nor a critical mass willing to cause enough damage to make voters care. And the majority of politicians do not care enough about the long term consequences (or alternatively, realize caring about the long term consequences won't win them votes).

Re: Ask HN: Anyone else feels the commoditization of real estate is unethical?

#338

Post by alfor »

bamboozled wrote: post #304
targ65 wrote: post #172

Like 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…

housing is complicated My bullshit detector went off right here. Housing isn't complicated. It's only complicated by investment money being involved. Having a roof over ones head is a basic human right. In Australia, the market is so hot, very few young people can afford anything, if you're living in a nice place, you can easily be kicked out after your rent doubles. I know of good, professional people who migrated t…

But you need someone else to provide your ’basic human right’

Is housing expensive in popular cities or everywhere?

What is preventing people (you?) from building cheap houses on cheap land? Is it regulation?

We are headed for a massive population crash almost everywhere, the housing market will completely collapse in the next 10 years and will not recover.

You can look at Japan and Italy as a head up, they are starting to give away houses in the countryside.

Re: Ask HN: Anyone else feels the commoditization of real estate is unethical?

#339

Post by tlholaday »

andrepd wrote: post #61

Georgism is the idea that, although the improvements built on land can be owned by a private person, land itself cannot, being a part of the natural world which is by right the common property of all humankind. By this idea, anyone claiming exclusive use of a piece of land owes to the community a rent equal to the value of the unimproved land. This idea extends to all that is (or ought to be) the commons: natural res…

Georgeism has my vote.

How do we get to SALSA (https://www.radicalxchange.org/media/blog/millennials-zoomer...) ?

Re: Ask HN: Anyone else feels the commoditization of real estate is unethical?

#340

Post by jefftk »

mnd999 wrote: post #335
targ65 wrote: post #172

Like 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…

> Deregulate construction, get rid of unions, prioritize developer rights over tenant or homeowner rights. That’s how you build slums. Which I think is what you’re proposing.

Most people in favor of the regulating construction are talking about removing density restrictions, not building codes.
Post reply on HN