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

601–610 of 764 posts

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

#601

Post by x86x87 »

ItsMonkk wrote: post #556
carom wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>No. Renters are paying for the value of the land and the improvements. If the rental price of the apartment is above that, they won't pay it and find another place. Then why are investors a problem?

If investors are investing in apartments for people to live in there is no problem. If investors are investing in land and leaving it empty waiting for the local city to build valuable infrastructure around them before they sell it, that's a major problem. A land value tax will see the former do better and the later to do much worse.

Do capitalism!

No, not like that.

As a society we need to decide if we want to have the cake or eat the cake. If I own the land, I own the land. The city has a responsibility to consider this (and many other things) when developing infra.

There are a multitude of levers that can be pulled to deincentivize this behavior, but the tragedy is that the people who benefit from it are hand in hand with the people that make and apply the rules.

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

#602

Post by djohnston »

prvit wrote: post #318
notpachet wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You certainly have less of it.

Surely it's the other way around. The renter has far more freedom, they can easily pack up their things and go. The renter has also has far fewer responsibilities than the owner.

They would still need to complete their lease or pay the penalty, I dont think 'easily' is the appropriate adverb. Besides homeowners can also do this, it's called selling your home, people do it all the time albeit with a bit more paperwork than the renter.

The lack of freedom derives not from imaginary mobility constraints, but from the provision of shelter coming from a 3rd party landlord. Your roof is resting on the whims of a profit motive for someone who owes you nothing.

You can't see how that presents a fundamental lack of independence?

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

#603

Post by carom »

ameister14 wrote: post #90
marcus0x62 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you propose we would — systematically — provide housing to people who, for whatever reason, are not in a position to buy? Should housing be bifurcated into government-provided housing for renters and privately-owned housing for those fortunate enough to have the money and stability to buy? Would you like to live in government housing, or would you prefer to keep the investor-owned rental option, but have them…

>How do you propose we would — systematically — provide housing to people who, for whatever reason, are not in a position to buy? Should housing be bifurcated into government-provided housing for renters and privately-owned housing for those fortunate enough to have the money and stability to buy? So...council estates? Subsidized housing is a thing we have. >realize that property rentals are a necessary service that…

>Landlords don't create added value. I'm skeptical that it is a necessary service

Subdividing your land and making it available to others is valuable. The world without that is all single family homes.

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

#605

Post by adamdusty »

larsiusprime wrote: post #433
sershe wrote: post #415

There's no basic human right to have a roof over your head, for the simple reason that someone has to make the roof. Saying "I have a right to have it [without building it yourself]" is saying "I have a right to force someone to build it for me". I dunno about you, I'm uneasy about forced labor. Even beyond that, there's certainly no right to have the roof over your head wherever you want - there is simply not enough…

> I'm uneasy about forced labor. I'm with you! But what I'm not okay with is gatekeeping of the resource that REALLY makes real estate valuable -- LAND. Nobody made the land. I'm okay with paying for the labor and capital that goes into housing construction. I'm not okay with somebody extracting massive amounts of value out of the economy just because they own title to the land. If you want to look at the stats for w…

Okay but what's your solution? The reason land is valuable is because many people want it in specific areas. I genuinely don't have an answer to the question.

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

#606

Post by carom »

ameister14 wrote: post #246
wnolens wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A house costs more than some people have. Without a rental market, those people become homeless or completely dependant on government. Neither is desirable. Without the profit incentive, what developer would build a multi unit apartment building to achieve higher density living in cities?

I'd say a house costs more than almost anyone has; it's why people need to take out loans to purchase them. That said, without a rental market the price of houses goes way down. As a result, the people that cannot afford houses then are mostly the same people that cannot currently afford rent. This is because the mortgage payment and insurance for a home is actually lower than the monthly rent. If the top value were…

So you have a city like Los Angeles or NYC. You convert all housing to single family homes. Can more people of fewer people live there now?

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

#607

Post by nrmitchi »

liketochill wrote: post #561
nrmitchi wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“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…

In Canada we don’t have 30 year fixed mortgages, the longest I have heard of anyone getting is 7 years and that’s me. Despite not having cost certainty in the long term we have the same property market issues as every other desirable place to live.

Those mortgages are still subsidized though. A 5-yr term before it adjusts, with upward protections on rate increases is still not what a "free market" would provide. These are government sponsored (in some way) programs to increse demand for homeownership without a corresponding investment in increasing supply.

Housing being used as a bet on appreciation, which fuels buying, which causes appreciation is best solved by building more housing. The way to make housing cheaper (or not be a speculation vehicle) is to build more housing. Full stop.

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

#608

Post by x86x87 »

ruined wrote: post #515
ethbr0 wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well said and interesting. Part of the problem with change is that there are always negative effects somewhere , but the answer should be to address those negative effects... not to postpone change until a mythical no-negative version is found.

probably the main negative consequence of any real estate regime change would be the destruction of incredible amounts of (paper) wealth. if you're going to reduce the market price of real estate, you're going to devalue one of the most foundational assets in the economy. but, that's the point. you can't reduce real estate prices without reducing real estate prices.

Destruction of wealth would be bad since that would impact everyone (homeowner or not). I would opt for wealth transfer. Build more housing! Once the demand decreases the price will decrease. This also solves another fundamental problem: we pretend that there are X houses and X people that need a place to live. In reality there are more people than houses. Way more. Build more houses. Build high density housing. Stop treating housing like some sort of holy grail investment.

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

#610

Post by thebigspacefuck »

liketochill wrote: post #561
nrmitchi wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“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…

In Canada we don’t have 30 year fixed mortgages, the longest I have heard of anyone getting is 7 years and that’s me. Despite not having cost certainty in the long term we have the same property market issues as every other desirable place to live.

7 year fixed mortgage? Do you pay off in 7 years or does the rate readjust?
Post reply on HN