Live data from Hacker News

If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund

wsj.com

111–120 of 1001 posts

Re: If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund

#111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since land is a limited asset they can effectively corner the market in specific regions and gain pricing power, allowing them to turn that 20% purchase price premium into a hefty profit. Cities can counter this by allowing more new construction but backfilling Single Family Residences requires land and that may not be readily available within certain commute distances.

It's slightly more complicated than that because what they'll do is keep the properties and rent them. There being few houses to buy increases the demand for rent, and cornering the rental market means you can control rent prices.

There is no analysis anywhere that suggests Blackrock is poised to corner the rental market.

Re: If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund

#112
post #81
post #16

This is what happens when you keep printing money and keep mortgage rates incredibly low. All that money's gotta go somewhere. Hey, at least the CPI isn't going up right? Its only the most expensive thing in most people's lives that has doubled in cost in about 10 years. Same thing for stock prices, and slowly other commodity prices are catching up as well. Non-homeowners are being shafted by this fed/ecb policy. Eve…

Right now interest rates are low, they cannot use them as a tool in a crisis, for this reason they are printing money to lower the overall debt obligation of the US. Inflating away our debt. This will eventually lead to inflation at which point the interest rates will rise again (prediction, at the end of the decade). This is the correct play for where we are in the long term debt cycle. In my opinion, this is happen…

> We just need to make sure it flows to the correct places.

That's the key, and also something that's unsolved. History shows that a lot of the money will be squandered in increasing "clever" ways, and it may take until the end of the decade before the public even realizes that it happened.

Re: If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund

#113
post #98
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i am confused by your first sentence. what do non-homeowners sell?

Some people say "Well, you're paying more but you can also sell it for more afterwards". But non-homeowners are still paying more for less. That's the argument I am trying to make (poorly)

My rent doesn't change with interest rates.

Re: If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund

#115

This hurts people who already own houses, too - property taxes are assessed on the appraised value of the home, which is a function of what the similarly-sized houses in your area sold for most recently. My property taxes have increased 10% every year for the past several years (and it would have been more if not for a legislative 10% annual cap). I worry that there will come a day when I've paid off my mortgage but…

I really don't see how you're complaining -- the value of your home is going up way more in absolute terms than the property tax you're paying. If you don't have cash, take out a small mortgage on the house to pay the property taxes. You'll still come out ahead in the end.

It's still a pain. And once you bought a house, you might like to think of it as an unmovable good (literally, in many languages). Now your cash flow doesn't permit you to live there.

Also, with low/zero IR, PV of tax payments is infinite, it's not like increasing house price is offsetting that.

Re: If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund

#116
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That actually messes with single family home owners more. I would love to provide more housing and make more money.

I don't care. Landlords aren't "providing housing" they are just money conduits. It is demonstrably the labor of their tenants which provides the housing, and the pendulum needs to swing back in the tenants' favor for a while.

[deleted]

Re: If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund

#117
post #16

This is what happens when you keep printing money and keep mortgage rates incredibly low. All that money's gotta go somewhere. Hey, at least the CPI isn't going up right? Its only the most expensive thing in most people's lives that has doubled in cost in about 10 years. Same thing for stock prices, and slowly other commodity prices are catching up as well. Non-homeowners are being shafted by this fed/ecb policy. Eve…

Not arguing with you, but are you suggesting that raising mortgage rates and/or stopping the printing of money will get rid of the Blackrocks and make housing affordable to the working class?

Re: If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund

#119
post #32

If only so many people didn't treat land and houses like investments, there wouldn't be such a disastrous hoarding problem. Henry George's Land Value Tax [1][2] seems like an obvious economic fix that would require a large fraction of the population to change how they think about land and natural resources, but most of them are invested in such a way (i.e. owning multiple houses on multiple parcels of land, often wit…

I already pay a Land Value Tax to my town.

Land value taxes ignore the value of buildings constructed on the land. It’s very different from current property taxes because it incentivizes density.

Re: If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund

#120
post #94
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Non homeowners are paying way more whilst getting less in return. I really dont understand the logic of being OK with paying double for a house, just because the buyer can sell it for the same amount (or higher) afterwards. I could purchase a 150m2 house with my salary a decade ago. Now I could find a 75m2 house that would be too expensive for me. I dont care about being able to sell the house for more money afterwar…

> paying double for a house Are you talking about monthly payment or lump sum? When the lump sum doubles yet the monthly payment is the same, has the cost really changed? To me, no. I was never going to buy lump sum, so I only care about monthly payment.

Presumably, owing money for 60 years instead of 30 years will cost you much more in the long run. And more baked in interest early in the loan means less recovered when you sell.
Post reply on HN