Houses are for living, not for speculation
en.wikipedia.org
Houses are for living, not for speculation
1–10 of 135 posts
Re: Houses are for living, not for speculation
#2So is energy, food, water and space. And yet, all cost money.
Re: Houses are for living, not for speculation
#3I wholeheartedly agree with this. My opinion is that governments should tax 2nd, 3rd and further housing so as to prevent people from accumulating residential buildings.
If you want to live of your rents, buy a commercial or industrial building, speculate with that. But residential construction should be protected to ensure each household is able to buy one with the average country salary.
Re: Houses are for living, not for speculation
#4I wholeheartedly agree with this. My opinion is that governments should tax 2nd, 3rd and further housing so as to prevent people from accumulating residential buildings. If you want to live of your rents, buy a commercial or industrial building, speculate with that. But residential construction should be protected to ensure each household is able to buy one with the average country salary.
I assume that increasing the taxes would just lead to higher rents, right?
Re: Houses are for living, not for speculation
#5So is energy, food, water and space. And yet, all cost money.
False dichotomy. The fact that something costs money doesn't mean it has to become a speculative asset.
Re: Houses are for living, not for speculation
#6It's not wrong.
I would 100% support measures that inhibit corporations from owning residential property.
Apartments are probably a special case, but I'm not entirely convinced the age of giant corporate complexes is a good one.
I also don't necessarily mind if a PERSON owns a house and rents it out (e.g., to spend a year somewhere else, or because it's a lake house or something), but I get suspicious of they own a bunch of them and make it a business. Denying corporate status would discourage that.
Re: Houses are for living, not for speculation
#7This is probably the reason why Gen Z is turning towards China and will eventually come out on top if a economic collapse in the west were to happen.
Re: Houses are for living, not for speculation
#8So is energy, food, water and space. And yet, all cost money.
What kind of speculation exists over energy, water and space? I'm really curious to know.
Re: Houses are for living, not for speculation
#9I wholeheartedly agree with this. My opinion is that governments should tax 2nd, 3rd and further housing so as to prevent people from accumulating residential buildings. If you want to live of your rents, buy a commercial or industrial building, speculate with that. But residential construction should be protected to ensure each household is able to buy one with the average country salary.
I assume that increasing the taxes would just lead to higher rents, right?
Which would favour people with fewer houses, which don't have to pay the increased taxes and so their rents could be lower.
So the 2nd, 3rd house taxes could be relatively low but for the 10th they would be ginormous.
Re: Houses are for living, not for speculation
#10I wholeheartedly agree with this. My opinion is that governments should tax 2nd, 3rd and further housing so as to prevent people from accumulating residential buildings. If you want to live of your rents, buy a commercial or industrial building, speculate with that. But residential construction should be protected to ensure each household is able to buy one with the average country salary.
I assume that increasing the taxes would just lead to higher rents, right?
Possibly but it would also create more private equity reits that would build and operate these multi-family units. There isn’t a clean solution without making it illegal for companies to own single-family homes.