Earlier quoted context omitted.
That won't fix anything. Many rentals are apartment buildings and are built/owned by large companies. You would effectively make the situation worse because individuals wouldn't be able to build high density housing if they're only allowed one unit. Edit: why disagree?
Controversial opinion, but corporate landlords tend to be better than individual landlords because it's impersonal and it's harder to hide. They also have different tax treatment. > individuals wouldn't be able to build high density housing Who exactly has (a) enough money to build an apartment block and (b) not enough to put it in a corporate wrapper? (Admittedly the wrapper problem is a serious issue for any kind o…
Housing Is a Labor Issue: Land owners are taking all the wage gains
61–70 of 149 posts
Re: Housing Is a Labor Issue: Land owners are taking all the wage gains
#62The problem isn't land owners it's landlords. Renting should be illegal and anyone caught accepting rent should lose his property to the renter. Owning a lot of land/houses isn't really the problem. It's when you're not using them that's the problem. You should just sell and not leech on society by renting.
All income from capital is renting.
Re: Housing Is a Labor Issue: Land owners are taking all the wage gains
#63This story is being repeated across countries and cities. It really is high time there is some serious regulation around home ownership, especially as an investment vehicle. I would even say this is an existential issue for our current civilizational model - the unaffordability of housing is contributing to demographic decline globally.
> It really is high time there is some serious regulation around home ownership, especially as an investment vehicle. Occupancy taxes would be a very good start--especially if applied aggressively to investment holders (resident owners aren't really the problem) who can't demonstrate that they live in a space. It's a lot harder calculation to hold a space unoccupied in the hope of getting better rent if you're starin…
Re: Housing Is a Labor Issue: Land owners are taking all the wage gains
#64The problem isn't land owners it's landlords. Renting should be illegal and anyone caught accepting rent should lose his property to the renter. Owning a lot of land/houses isn't really the problem. It's when you're not using them that's the problem. You should just sell and not leech on society by renting.
Re: Housing Is a Labor Issue: Land owners are taking all the wage gains
#65While I agree that landlords are vampires, that here is wrong: > But there is a stack of research a mile high that shows that the number one thing we need is a lot more housing supply There are millions of units vacant everywhere, be it the US [1] or Germany [2]. The last thing the world needs is more housing construction, especially with the insane CO2 footprint of anything involving concrete. The problem is that ru…
>The last thing the world needs is more housing construction, especially with the insane CO2 footprint of anything involving concrete. That self imposed limit is exactly what keeps prices high. Every city has some run down areas that serve no purpose but are wasted space and could be turned into housing. Also, as some others already said it, living in urban areas reduces your footprint versus living far away in the c…
tl;dr: Germany needs to heavily improve its rural/suburbs/general internet connectivity to encourage WFH. It can be insanely frustrating getting anything resembling modern internet in some places.
Speaking on the German situation as I recently experienced that (100% WFH moving out of the city center). I was looking for a flat in a radius of 100km around a city and was very flexible with where I ended up. I had two must-haves: dedicated office (as in, a spare room) plus reasonably fast and stable internet. For (my) remote work anything >= 50Mbit VDSL (roughly 50 down/10 up) is workable. 250/40 was my minimum when searching. I narrowed it down to two solid choices I wanted to check out: 1) rural village of about 20-50 houses and 2) suburbs/300m from city border of a smallish (~50k people) city.
It turned out 1) did not connect the fiber connection they could get (quite literally "I don't understand this and never needed it."). This combined with some other less than ideal things led me to discard 1).
When checking out 2) I found out they didn't connect the cable internet marked as available online ("It sits somewhere in the garden, we don't want to drill the house walls." Drilling the walls for the PV they put up before I moved in was fine...). But they had 250/40 VDSL available and I confirmed then and there that you get at least 100Mbit download.
I signed for 2) based on 100MBit+ VDSL plus liking the overall package (location, neighbors, landlord, flat). I could order 250/40, but two weeks later got a call that they could only offer me 16/1 (not a typo) due to "no available lines". I took that offer, because mobile network is either very expensive (Telekom 5G unlimited is 85€) or very unreliable (Telefonica 4G unlimited is 30€, but went down to 2MBit/s in some areas with full reception) and I needed at least some fallback connectivity. As a data point: Google meet can manage about 1 or 2 incoming video streams and spotty outgoing video at 16/1. I setup a multipath setup to combine Telefonica and the 16/1 land line.
It took me a better part of a month to finally convince support to send a technician out to address the problem that I was marked as offline in their system despite being connected. It turned out someone is blocking "my" line since about 3 years after moving out so I somehow can get a slow speed fallback, but nothing more. The technician belled out the line to the DSLAM, overrode the assignment and assigned the line "officially" to me. When we got talking he mentioned that he had to do the same "fix" the last time someone moved in and that he just expanded the DSLAM VDSL capacity. I had to wait about 30min for him to document that in the system and then order a faster connection before someone else snatches up that line. Which surprisingly worked out to a 250/40 landline finally.
In conclusion: it took me, a quite technical person who depends on the connection for work, about 2 months to get a workable landline after doing all possible due diligence before signing my lease. If I had not haunted support or got a less motivated technician, I would still be sitting here with blurry Google Meets. This is not how you motivate people to move back to rural areas. Based on my experience with 1) there are also problems the state can not tackle. If the landlords don't see the value in even letting a fiber provider lay a dark fiber in the basement, there is nothing the billions of digital infrastructure funding can do.
P.S. Beaming internet down from frigging space via Starlink costs less than Telekom 5G unlimited... P.P.S. I know this is just a single data point, but the amount of locations I had to reject because of not even theoretical fast landlines was insane
EDIT to add: I am not even talking about 1GBit everywhere, just a floor of maybe 50/10 or even 100/20 (reliable!) so you can realistically WFH.
Re: Housing Is a Labor Issue: Land owners are taking all the wage gains
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cities also have vacant office space. It's likely more economical and greener to convert the existing building vs building new construction in the "wasted space". I like the idea of what you describe for remote work. I'm not sure how effective that would be in the US. It seems many people want very specific amenities or locations. Or like one friend, they wouldn't move back just because of "all the druggies". I think…
Office space is not good for apartments, because the floor plans are usually huge. WTC towers were (iirc) 63x63 meters large, if the rooms are 5x5 meters, you can only build usable rooms in the outer strip of the building, while the internal 53x53 square is usable only for storage, toilets and hallways, which don't require windows... and that's a huge waste of space
Re: Housing Is a Labor Issue: Land owners are taking all the wage gains
#67While I agree that landlords are vampires, that here is wrong: > But there is a stack of research a mile high that shows that the number one thing we need is a lot more housing supply There are millions of units vacant everywhere, be it the US [1] or Germany [2]. The last thing the world needs is more housing construction, especially with the insane CO2 footprint of anything involving concrete. The problem is that ru…
The population is still growing, however you want to slice it. > The problem is that rural areas ("flyover states") have been left to rot: no reliable electricity grid, no public transport, basic infrastructure from grocery stores over schools to basic healthcare has closed down This narrative also works in the UK, but where the abandoned areas are mostly coastal. Seaside towns with no tourists and no fish. Ex-mining…
Ironic, the post was about how people are starved for the resource of shelter. I didn't see you call anyone here out for "demonizing" corporations or individual landlords with many real estate investment properties.
I guess this criticism only applies to conservatives in rural areas with barely anything.
Re: Housing Is a Labor Issue: Land owners are taking all the wage gains
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
Office space is not good for apartments, because the floor plans are usually huge. WTC towers were (iirc) 63x63 meters large, if the rooms are 5x5 meters, you can only build usable rooms in the outer strip of the building, while the internal 53x53 square is usable only for storage, toilets and hallways, which don't require windows... and that's a huge waste of space
Well, what else are you going to do with the vacant building? Seems like it's a bigger waste not to. I guess we'll see how it turns out in NYC since they're proposing it right now.
Re: Housing Is a Labor Issue: Land owners are taking all the wage gains
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the issue is the supply of rental (i.e. investment) properties is too low, do we want to encourage or discourage investment homes?
Who wants to rent? I imagine most would opt to own instead. Rent is certainly far higher than a mortgage would be, which makes little sense if you're trying to encourage ownership (as often is the story about the american dream)
As an example, 30 year fixed rate mortgages are only a thing in the US because of govt guarantees.
Re: Housing Is a Labor Issue: Land owners are taking all the wage gains
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
The population is still growing, however you want to slice it. > The problem is that rural areas ("flyover states") have been left to rot: no reliable electricity grid, no public transport, basic infrastructure from grocery stores over schools to basic healthcare has closed down This narrative also works in the UK, but where the abandoned areas are mostly coastal. Seaside towns with no tourists and no fish. Ex-mining…
>Why is it so cheap? Well, unemployment is really high: The thing is nobody (with a stable job) wants to live in areas with high unemployment because of all the social issues those areas have.