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

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Aug 13, 2022, 4:28 PM UTC

nrmitchi wrote: post #483

rojobuffalo wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

4x higher tax, not 4x total cost. First housing prices would crash, so rental prices would also drop. And they wouldn't go up 1:1 with tax increases. They would go up by some percentage which is fine. It should be a little more expensive month-to-month to rent vs. own. Renting should still be available, but a lower proportion of housing should be rentals.

“It should be more expensive month to month to rent vs own” It already is. There are many tax incentives geared towards making owning cheaper. If owning was t already subsidized do you really think anyone would be handing out 4% 30-yr fixed rate mortgages like candy? Removing these would also make housing prices crash, which would lower both purchase cost AND rent, yet I don’t see many people pushing that idea forwar…

Post by doteseth » Sat, Aug 13, 2022, 4:29 PM UTC

acover wrote: post #255

cudgy wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The zoning argument is such a myopic perspective on the problem. The issue with housing affordability is across many communities, most of which have no issues with shortages of buildable land nor even shortages of housing. The primary impact on prices is from the demand side due to cheap credit from artificially low interest rates and speculation by large investors and small time speculators moving into real estate.

Do you have an example city? I'm curious because when there is lots of supply to meet demand why would prices go up?

Post by anamax » Sat, Aug 13, 2022, 4:30 PM UTC

_8j50 wrote: post #350

jefftk wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.)

Sellers themselves would be incentivized to make their house in good condition to sell it at a profit. If all they do is renovate then that should be a service to the original seller. If your house is devalued by 20% when selling, you pay a renovator to fix it up and take 50% of profits so instead you only lose 10%. Like you said they provide a service, they could handle the sale as a real estate agent and get more p…

Post by tharkun__ » Sat, Aug 13, 2022, 4:32 PM UTC

ItsMonkk wrote: post #510

tharkun__ wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I sent you a picture of a vacant piece of land in the middle of New York City's best neighborhood and asked you what it was worth, could you answer me? You wouldn't be able to until I told you what kind of home you are allowed to build. If I only allow you to build a shack or make it a park you won't be able to extract any money by renting it out and thus you wouldn't buy it at any price, even though the neighborh…

Yes, land use is one factor. What is interesting is that the dynamic actually flips once there is adequate zoning. Take a look at this[0] video on Tokyo zoning and how he talks about living in an industrial zoned area. He talks about how it's cheaper to do so, and if you want to move to a single family zoned area, it's actually more expensive! Under the current system, landowners want their own land to be zoned as hi…

Post by sampo » Sat, Aug 13, 2022, 4:34 PM UTC

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…