181–190 of 207 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Meanwhile, in Poland tech salaries are 3x-4x the GDP per capita, which is why many of software developers own more than one house/apartment.
What about the people who aren't devs?
If they live in a city they are screwed, unless they are lucky enough to get a really well-paying job.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Not sure you will ever be able to ban investors from owning properties that are rented out long-term Why not? We are making up the rules as we go. The government has the guns, it can do what it wants. > - a fair amount of the population wants to, or can only afford to, rent Well a fair amount of the population wants to buy a home remotely close to where their job and family is, but it turns out there's a population…
Why doesn’t someone need to be a landlord? Without landlords you gonna have a lot more homeless people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe from the POV from someone who badly wants to buy a condo, but from the POV of a renter who will never buy, these investors are the ones that are creating their housing.
No they're not. This is like saying the scalpers who bulk-buy all the concert tickets and resell at huge markups are "ticket creators." If you take investors (30 percent of home buyers, according to TFA) out of real estate then demand goes way down, taking prices with it and making housing a lot more affordable.
Landlords provide housing in the same way the supermarket provides food. They didn't grow the food, but they did enable it to get to you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm guessing you don't have children? I don't either, but I suspect that's folks main motivation for buying a home.
Bingo, it sucks to live with kids in a condo because condos aren't built for families, neither are the neighborhoods with condos. There's other ways to build density without packing everyone into sad sardine cans.
There’s no inherent limitation on having a family friendly condo.
In many European countries families live in condos. And they can have great amenities like a swimming pool and a playground. And quite spacious. With highly dense walkable and even car-free neighbourhoods.
Sure you might not have a huge own backyard but there’s probably a park nearby where you can socialize with people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What definition of "monopoly" are you using here...?
It being illegal, due to restrictive zoning, for private parties to build at higher densities.
Yes they should force more zones to allow dense housing too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Landlords dont build housing.
Right but not everyone can live in a house they own all the time.
Landlords are a drain on the economy and there are viable alternative models. We do not need landlords.
> The central bank defines an investor as a buyer who took out a mortgage to buy the property while maintaining a mortgage on another home. In the US, a lot has been made about large investment companies buying up houses, but this is something different entirely: > This category represents homebuyers with multiple mortgaged properties. This means investors are homebuyers who either: > * purchase an investment propert…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No they're not. This is like saying the scalpers who bulk-buy all the concert tickets and resell at huge markups are "ticket creators." If you take investors (30 percent of home buyers, according to TFA) out of real estate then demand goes way down, taking prices with it and making housing a lot more affordable.
Scalpers would be more like sub leasers here. The actual builders build the housing, but you aren't going to pay your rent to 1000 different people who all played a part in building it, and those builders want to be paid now, not over 30 years. So the landlord pays them all out now and consolidates the debt. Landlords provide housing in the same way the supermarket provides food. They didn't grow the food, but they d…