Public-ownership rental as a third option to renting or owning a house
1–10 of 262 posts
Re: Public-ownership rental as a third option to renting or owning a house
#2This is "the rest of the story" on a recent HN submission which was not as it turns out the "rent vs. buy" polemic much of the discussion seemed to expect (not without some basis given the headline and structure of the article), but actually a fairly radical, and intersting, housing policy proposal. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26824383
The article's author has in fact written a book on the subject, a chapter of which is exerpted here. (I've chosen the chapter title rather than article title for the submission.) The previous article had somehow managed to completely omit mention. The book itself is The Affordable City, by Shane Phillips, from Island Press:
Re: Public-ownership rental as a third option to renting or owning a house
#3This is "the rest of the story" on a recent HN submission which was not as it turns out the "rent vs. buy" polemic much of the discussion seemed to expect (not without some basis given the headline and structure of the article), but actually a fairly radical, and intersting, housing policy proposal. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26824383 The article's author has in fact written a book on the subject, a chapter…
You're right that https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26824383 was completely derailed by its title, which often happens with sensational titles, especially about universal topics like housing, food, health, transportation.
But I don't think https://www.planetizen.com/features/110948-affordable-city-o... (the URL you submitted here) is a very good alternative—it seems kind of boring (mostly platitudes and cheerleading), and doesn't seem to cover the interesting bit, which is the specific proposal that you reference. So I've changed the URL back to the Atlantic article for now, with a variation of the subtitle which references that specific idea.
If there's a third article which is even better, we can change it again.
Re: Public-ownership rental as a third option to renting or owning a house
#4If this is such a good idea, why don’t they raise private funds from various charities and rich people to fund an experiment? Why am I as a taxpayer constantly asked to fund ever more schemes? This one has the all markings of a non-profit, and if you involve the government and associated bureaucracy it will become an entrenched quagmire like the huge housing projects that have been torn down in many cities. I don’t see why we need a trillion-dollar slush fund to make this happen.
Re: Public-ownership rental as a third option to renting or owning a house
#5How is this any different from owning shares in a housing cooperative? Aside from the risk being - possibly - divided across multiple properties, I don't see how this would solve the main issues driving appreciating housing prices any better than attacking their root causes (build more housing supply, limit housing speculation, and prevent overleveraging).
Re: Public-ownership rental as a third option to renting or owning a house
#6"those losses aren’t equitably distributed, either: Nearly 2 million mortgages are underwater in the U.S., and they’re disproportionately concentrated in Black and Latino communities. Tenants in coastal cities, meanwhile, know the pain of forking over more and more rent every year, unable to save for a down payment and living at the mercy of sometimes unscrupulous landlords."
What on earth does not equitable mean in terms of distributing losses?
Secondly "living at the mercy" hold on, renters aren't tenant farmers who can't leave their lord's land. People do actually choose to live in expensive rented accommodation. They make the choice that the property location etc is worth more than the cash, to them.
Re: Public-ownership rental as a third option to renting or owning a house
#7> A third option is necessary: a way to rent without making someone else rich.
I care how much I pay. I don't give a shit who gets it.
Re: Public-ownership rental as a third option to renting or owning a house
#8Anyone who has seen how public owned goods turn out would realize how much of a bad idea it is: for a budget similar to the DoD, you may get wait lines like in a DMV, with as much administrative fiddling as the NASA, with a quality of service as good as the DHS. If you are lucky, you may get as many choices as their are public transportation option in the midwest.
Thanks but no thanks.
Re: Public-ownership rental as a third option to renting or owning a house
#9How is this any different from owning shares in a housing cooperative? Aside from the risk being - possibly - divided across multiple properties, I don't see how this would solve the main issues driving appreciating housing prices any better than attacking their root causes (build more housing supply, limit housing speculation, and prevent overleveraging).
That’s what I was thinking. However, there are some co-Ops in NYC that allow you to buy shares at a really cheap price VS what the market would pay. But when you sell, the co-op sells the shares so although you profit, you won’t be as much as if it were sold at market value. But you paid below market so it works out.
However, these aren’t just open to anyone. You need to know people to get in. It’s a self policing community that takes care of each other over generations. Even if you’re “in”, you’ll likely be on a waiting list until availability opens up.
Re: Public-ownership rental as a third option to renting or owning a house
#10Isn't this what terrible public housing is already? Could it be less terrible or would it always devolve into a housing caste system because middle-/upper-classes would never use it? Set-asides for "affordable housing" in new developments are an absolute joke because there are very few units, they often have separate "servant-like" entrances, and may not be treated equally compared to other residents.
Also, the root cause isn't housing prices, it's a lack of supply because of NIMBYs, a lack of fast/cheap transportation, developing for maximum traffic/commute times like LA, and a lack of development around walkable/self-contained living areas.