Live data from Hacker News

San Francisco has nearly five empty homes per homeless resident

sf.curbed.com

21–30 of 204 posts

Re: San Francisco has nearly five empty homes per homeless resident

#21
post #13
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should different rules apply to foreigners in this context? An American billionaire buying a few condos and keeping them empty has the exact same effect as a Chinese billionaire doing so. Rules around vacant homes are good, though, and I strongly support them.

At least an American billionaire pays some American taxes. If a foreign speculator makes a lot of money they aren't even paying any income or capital gains taxes here.

The cynic in me would correct you that neither pays much taxes.

Re: San Francisco has nearly five empty homes per homeless resident

#22
post #13
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should different rules apply to foreigners in this context? An American billionaire buying a few condos and keeping them empty has the exact same effect as a Chinese billionaire doing so. Rules around vacant homes are good, though, and I strongly support them.

At least an American billionaire pays some American taxes. If a foreign speculator makes a lot of money they aren't even paying any income or capital gains taxes here.

They are still paying plenty in property tax. From the city's perspective, you couldn't ask for a better resident. Somebody who pays full property tax and consumes almost no services (schools, police, etc).

Re: San Francisco has nearly five empty homes per homeless resident

#23
post #13
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should different rules apply to foreigners in this context? An American billionaire buying a few condos and keeping them empty has the exact same effect as a Chinese billionaire doing so. Rules around vacant homes are good, though, and I strongly support them.

At least an American billionaire pays some American taxes. If a foreign speculator makes a lot of money they aren't even paying any income or capital gains taxes here.

American billionaires dont pay much taxes either.

The solution to this is to fix the tax code, not retreat further into nationalism.

Re: San Francisco has nearly five empty homes per homeless resident

#24
post #10

[flagged]

>that the cognoscenti proletariat should be empowered to confiscate all property and redistribute it as they wish Or we could, you know, build some cheap housing.

That's definitely not what the implication of the article is. Many would read this and think, well, we should just put the homeless people into those vacant homes!

Re: San Francisco has nearly five empty homes per homeless resident

#26
post #8

When I lived in San Francisco, the newly built condo building across from me was fully empty (but fully sold) for all the years I lived there. This is a tower in SOMA. There was only one apartment which appeared to be a corporate one that was occasionally utilized. The rise of foreign money parking money in real estate has screwed things up on a global level. San Francisco has felt the brunt of this due to their insa…

Why should different rules apply to foreigners in this context? An American billionaire buying a few condos and keeping them empty has the exact same effect as a Chinese billionaire doing so. Rules around vacant homes are good, though, and I strongly support them.

Everyone gets to feel good if they can blame "the wealthy foreigners" rather than look at their own crappy housing policies, such as the rampant NIMBYism and huge market distortion from Prop 13.

Faceless "wealthy foreigners" are easier to dislike than their own neighbors who show up at planning commission meetings to rant about someone adding an extra bedroom to their home (this is an actual thing I read about in San Francisco).

Re: San Francisco has nearly five empty homes per homeless resident

#28
post #7

> The census’ annual American Communities Survey defines a home as vacant if there is either no occupant or a temporary occupant—temporary meaning “people who will be there for two months or less.” So this is counting AirBnBs and other short-term rental spaces as vacant. > Vacancy rates are estimated by in-person visits to properties or by interviews via mail, email, or phone. I clicked through to the definition from…

More detailed definitions: https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/definitions.pdf

> Vacant Housing Units. A housing unit is vacant if no one is living in it at the time of the interview, unless its occupants are only temporarily absent. In addition, a vacant unit may be one which is entirely occupied by persons who have a usual residence elsewhere. New units not yet occupied are classified as vacant housing units if construction has reached a point where all exterior windows and doors are installed and final usable floors are in place. Vacant units are excluded if they are exposed to the elements, that is, if the roof, walls, windows, or doors no longer protect the interior from the elements, or if there is positive evidence (such as a sign on the house or block) that the unit is to be demolished or is condemned. Also excluded are quarters being used entirely for nonresidential purposes, such as a store or an office, or quarters used for the storage of business supplies or inventory, machinery, or agricultural products. Vacant sleeping rooms in lodging houses, transient accommodations, barracks, and other quarters not defined as housing units are not included in the statistics in this report. (See section on "Housing Unit.")

The survey also distinguishes different types of vacancies. See pages 4-6 of the linked document. The overall vacancy number could be misleading without seeing the breakdown.

Re: San Francisco has nearly five empty homes per homeless resident

#29
post #14

You can't build yourself out of the housing crisis when the problem is one of distribution, not one of supply. The idea that housing should be treated as an investment is, itself , the problem. How can you want housing to be affordable while also wanting housing to gain in value, i.e. increase in cost? These are completely contradictory aims. Zoom out for a second and consider how wild it is that we turned a life nec…

Lots of homeowners in SF who have made huge gains from their property investment pay lip service to their liberal worldview by insisting that any new construction must meet the most stringent review and have a very high percentage of units set aside for affordable housing. This way they are able to stop new construction, exacerbating the housing crisis and making their investment more valuable, while claiming they are fighting for affordable housing.

Re: San Francisco has nearly five empty homes per homeless resident

#30
post #8

When I lived in San Francisco, the newly built condo building across from me was fully empty (but fully sold) for all the years I lived there. This is a tower in SOMA. There was only one apartment which appeared to be a corporate one that was occasionally utilized. The rise of foreign money parking money in real estate has screwed things up on a global level. San Francisco has felt the brunt of this due to their insa…

Why should different rules apply to foreigners in this context? An American billionaire buying a few condos and keeping them empty has the exact same effect as a Chinese billionaire doing so. Rules around vacant homes are good, though, and I strongly support them.

There’s a lot of money in real estate. It’s better staying in the country than going to Chinese firms.

If it makes no difference to you, why not favor your own country?

Post reply on HN