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

Investors bought a quarter of US homes sold last year

pewtrusts.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 691 posts

Re: Investors bought a quarter of US homes sold last year

#221

Post by ryukafalz »

jaywalk wrote: post #203
davidw wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can make a decent argument that concentrated poverty does cause some problems. Which is why you should do your best to spread all kinds of housing throughout a city, including plenty of upzoning in wealthier areas.

Just build high-density housing in rich areas! And then what, you expect rich people to move in? They won't. Poor people are going to move in. And the rich people who made that area nice in the first place are going to flee, because it will turn into a not-nice area.

Famously all the rich people have moved out of Manhattan.

Re: Investors bought a quarter of US homes sold last year

#222

Post by bobthepanda »

giantg2 wrote: post #206
davidw wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This article, speaking to your point, is pretty convincing in terms of the data: https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/22524829/wall-street-housin... > The role of institutional investors is still being studied, but the popularity of the narrative strikes at something dangerous: People want a convenient boogeyman and when they get it, they often ignore the structural problems that are harder to combat. Housing undersupply…

So that's only one side of the equation. The other side is distribution. Perhaps we could have policies that create jobs in areas with shrinking populations or abundant cheap land and lax zoning. Nobody seems to talk about this.

You can lead a horse to water but you can‘t make it drink. Job poor areas in the US have no shortage of incentives or policies designed to lure companies there, but have had little success over the past few decades.

Re: Investors bought a quarter of US homes sold last year

#223

Post by jjcm »

i1856511 wrote: post #106

It should be illegal to own more than two homes.

Nearly impossible to regulate, and too rigid to boot.

Does a duplex count as two? If so that means triplexs higher MUDs are illegal, which will harm low income housing options.

Can companies own property? If so then the problem is easily escapable with a simple LLC. If not, then either existing ones have to be grandfathered, or the housing market is going to be flooded with corporate housing.

The better approach is to increase taxes for non-primary residences. Address the root of the problem rather than legislating it away - if mass-investment of housing is unprofitable, the problem addresses itself.

Re: Investors bought a quarter of US homes sold last year

#224

Post by ethbr0 »

davidw wrote: post #129
jaywalk wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're never going to win anyone over with the tired "if you disagree with me, you're a racist" BS. Low-income, high-density housing attracts problems. It has literally nothing to do with race. You could guarantee that the high-rise apartment building you want to construct down the street from me would be 100% filled with people who look like me, and I'd still oppose it. Keep your YIMBY nonsense IYBY.

It's a pretty well document fact that it has a lot of its roots in racism. https://www.epi.org/publication/the-color-of-law-a-forgotten... If that makes you feel uncomfortable, so be it. Americans spend zillions of dollars every year visiting Europe, which is full of high density housing. And come home raving about how much they love it. It does not 'cause problems'.

There's a correlation between crime / neighborhood blight and low income residents.

That correlation may be because of historic and current structural racism, lack of access to mental health services and a social safety net, or a myriad of other socio-economic issues, but it doesn't change the fact that it exists.

Insinuating that anyone who brings up those issues is racist isn't helpful.

It would be more productive to say "Yes, I understand why neighborhoods might be resistant to denser, low-income tolerant development, and here are some ways we could incorporate that fact into a productive plan..." E.g. building more mixed-income developments.

Re: Investors bought a quarter of US homes sold last year

#225

Post by themitigating »

jaywalk wrote: post #87
davidw wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This article, speaking to your point, is pretty convincing in terms of the data: https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/22524829/wall-street-housin... > The role of institutional investors is still being studied, but the popularity of the narrative strikes at something dangerous: People want a convenient boogeyman and when they get it, they often ignore the structural problems that are harder to combat. Housing undersupply…

Quoted post unavailable.

Too perfect how? Because you disagree with the viewpoint? What are the good reasons that people shouldn't want high density low-income housing?

Re: Investors bought a quarter of US homes sold last year

#226

Post by VirusNewbie »

What's nuts is not just that investors get to buy homes, but that its tax advantaged to do so. Between prop 13 in California, to 1031 exchanges, there are plenty of reasons to invest in RE over even say the stock market. I don't get to do a 1031 exchange for my Meta stock into AAPL or something...

Re: Investors bought a quarter of US homes sold last year

#227

Post by totony »

desperadovisa wrote: post #164
paxys wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is such a twisted framing of the issue. No one wants to "abolish property ownership". In fact housing proponents want the exact opposite – give everybody the opportunity to own a house rather than a select few large corporations and investors. Let me build my own house on a piece of land in or near the city, just like my grandparents did just a couple of generations ago. Remove years worth of excessive permits,…

Sorry but with all due respect, "too bad, go live in the middle of nowhere" is absolutely an acceptable answer. You're acting like you're entitled to live where ever you want, but the simple reality is that this is not possible. You need to come to grips with that objective fact.

You are acting like owning a home entitles you to dictate how other people get to live. It does not. Owning a home shouldn't allow you to dictate that someone cannot build a home near you. Unfortunately it does in some places, but this is fixable.

Re: Investors bought a quarter of US homes sold last year

#228

Post by giantg2 »

davidw wrote: post #129
jaywalk wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're never going to win anyone over with the tired "if you disagree with me, you're a racist" BS. Low-income, high-density housing attracts problems. It has literally nothing to do with race. You could guarantee that the high-rise apartment building you want to construct down the street from me would be 100% filled with people who look like me, and I'd still oppose it. Keep your YIMBY nonsense IYBY.

It's a pretty well document fact that it has a lot of its roots in racism. https://www.epi.org/publication/the-color-of-law-a-forgotten... If that makes you feel uncomfortable, so be it. Americans spend zillions of dollars every year visiting Europe, which is full of high density housing. And come home raving about how much they love it. It does not 'cause problems'.

Of course, they love visiting and perhaps the idea of it. Then they realize they can't have their larger houses, cars, etc that they want. And that government will be more involved in their lives (zoning, policies, prohibitions), which is fairly reasonable given the track record in many places in the US.

Re: Investors bought a quarter of US homes sold last year

#229

Post by icelancer »

aprdm wrote: post #69
JamesBarney wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We just need to remember that banning housing investment means banning rentals which is problematic for people who don't have good credit and a down payment.

The concept of credit score isn't something that has always existed in humanity. It's something that we can go on without, even more so given the ridiculous profitability of banks

Like IQ tests, the credit score has egalitarian roots, but modern day activists think they're discriminatory and should be abolished.

Re: Investors bought a quarter of US homes sold last year

#230

Post by dakna »

davidw wrote: post #129
jaywalk wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're never going to win anyone over with the tired "if you disagree with me, you're a racist" BS. Low-income, high-density housing attracts problems. It has literally nothing to do with race. You could guarantee that the high-rise apartment building you want to construct down the street from me would be 100% filled with people who look like me, and I'd still oppose it. Keep your YIMBY nonsense IYBY.

It's a pretty well document fact that it has a lot of its roots in racism. https://www.epi.org/publication/the-color-of-law-a-forgotten... If that makes you feel uncomfortable, so be it. Americans spend zillions of dollars every year visiting Europe, which is full of high density housing. And come home raving about how much they love it. It does not 'cause problems'.

>It does not 'cause problems'.

Like with most policies, the details are much more nuanced.

Check out the history of the Gropiusstadt in Berlin:

https://www.goethe.de/ins/jp/en/m/kul/sup/boe/21633080.html

Post reply on HN