21–30 of 192 posts
Why do new homes have to be built in competition with existing homes? With remote work and the digital elite moving wherever, why not just pop up new developments wholesale, complete with shopping and services somewhere out of the way and cheap?
Cities benefit from high urban density, and reducing density means less benefit.
Well, I'm against affordable housing then. Let Blackrock, who bought over 40% of the single family homes on the market, take it on the chin. Perhaps we can do a fire sale of corporate-owned homes. This has made me determined to fight affordable housing even more so. I'd also like to ask, why is British journalism so shit tier? It's a fucking joke.
It’s going to be very difficult to make housing more affordable with high interest rates and high inflation. I highly doubt just increasing supply is going to be enough.
I'll pick door number two, Monty. Not because that's what I actually want, but because I'm pretty certain that's how it will play out.
Lowering nominal asset prices is almost as hard as lowering nominal wages. It only happens when policymakers screw up.
That's what inflation is for.
This is so fundamental to the issue. It is impossible for housing to be simultaneously a good investment and affordable. Policymakers simply have to decide if they cater to those that already own homes, or those desperately wanting to buy one. I feel strongly housing is a basic human right, and so we should stop viewing residential property as an appreciating asset.
It’s going to be very difficult to make housing more affordable with high interest rates and high inflation. I highly doubt just increasing supply is going to be enough.
Investment banks will just buy up any affordable housing.
Value and affordability can be considered independently.
Increasing median income and economic growth both increase affordability, even if housing costs track inflation.
I really don't give a shit about the financial value of my home to someone else. Sure, my mortgage is calculated on it and I'll be paying that for the rest of my life but the true "value" of my home is the quality of life my family and I can enjoy here. What you're talking about is how much money some investor can make off of the desire of people to have this quality of life value for themselves. And quite honestly i…
If my house goes down in value but the trend is roughly general then I don't care indeed.
Not necessarily. If you add density to an existing lot, your land increases in value, and since it’s likely the majority of the value of your property, your property probably goes up in value. Then, the increased supply decreases the cost of shelter.
> decreases the cost of shelter.
Which is it?