Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 332 posts

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#211

Post by conanbatt »

baroffoos wrote: post #209
conanbatt wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But its the exact opposite. Rental is generally profitable. You can bet on land while also renting and making extra money. You can't argue that they are greedy for buying land but not greedy enough to squeeze more money out of it. The answer is somewhere else.

Because renting it is extra work and extra risk. You have to deal with finding someone to rent it to and then you have to keep inspecting the house to make sure they haven't wrecked it and then you have to fix any issues they report. Where as buying and selling later is very low maintenance.

You can delegate the entire administration, include insurance, and its free money.

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#212

Post by barry-cotter »

noobermin wrote: post #208
crazygringo wrote: post #201

In this conversation, it seems like people ignore the fact that there's a societal benefit to leaving buildings empty, at least in economic theory. Which is that it's keeping the space open for more productive use in the long term. Suppose you own a storefront or apartment that could fetch $5K/month right now, but you think it will fetch $10K/month in 3 years, and that leases are 10 years long. Well, the people/busin…

>Well, the people/businesses who can afford $10K/month are by definition more economically productive: the people must have higher-paying jobs, and the businesses must be more productive economically. This is one hell of an assumption. Wealthy people hold onto wealth, that's why they're wealthy. That isn't a societal benefit to anyone.

Money that is not being spent is almost always being invested. If cash is literally being hoarded under a mattress it’s neither being spend nor invested but that means that the value of everyone else’s money goes up by some infinitesimal amount. If Bill Gates turned his entire fortune into cash and then set it on fire the assets that that cash used to represent would not disappear. Bill Gates would just have made all other holders of dollars a bit richer.

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#213

Post by noobermin »

AbrahamParangi wrote: post #206
crazygringo wrote: post #201

In this conversation, it seems like people ignore the fact that there's a societal benefit to leaving buildings empty, at least in economic theory. Which is that it's keeping the space open for more productive use in the long term. Suppose you own a storefront or apartment that could fetch $5K/month right now, but you think it will fetch $10K/month in 3 years, and that leases are 10 years long. Well, the people/busin…

Hmm. Maybe I'm missing something. I don't understand how more efficient rent-collection (and literal rent-collection at that) is productive. I mean, isn't it definitionally not "productive"? I mean you can make the argument that by being more efficient at rent collection over some time horizon you funnel more money to yourself and other local industries but isn't this basically just a cost to everyone else at every o…

Whenever this argument is made, there seems to be this conflation of "economically good" and "x made me money." Just because you make money (or make more money) doing something doesn't mean it's a net good for society.

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#214

Post by conanbatt »

crazygringo wrote: post #201

In this conversation, it seems like people ignore the fact that there's a societal benefit to leaving buildings empty, at least in economic theory. Which is that it's keeping the space open for more productive use in the long term. Suppose you own a storefront or apartment that could fetch $5K/month right now, but you think it will fetch $10K/month in 3 years, and that leases are 10 years long. Well, the people/busin…

This is a bonkers line of argumentation. Speculation is not a productive activity. It is also potentially very destructive.

A different argument would be to say that the seller of the property is putting the money to better use, but nevertheless speculation of land, particularly in big cities, is purely a legal issue and regulatory capture. Change taxes to LVT and watch them dissapear.

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#215

Post by conanbatt »

Scoundreller wrote: post #2

Why is it a fine? Why not a tax? Taxing unused spaces sitting idle makes a lot more sense than income (ie: people’s work).

Spaces dont pay taxes. Only people pay taxes. Taxing it through estate or through income is not taxing space vs taxing human beings.

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#216

Post by barry-cotter »

amarte wrote: post #179

I'm surprised no one has mentioned China here. I was recently able to travel to China for the first time and was fascinated to learn about their housing market. Apparently the Chinese government doesn't have a property tax. For men in China, owning a home is already incredibly important. It's practically a requirement for getting married, to the point where a woman's family would almost certainly disapprove of a marr…

> I was told that the value of homes in these economic development areas -- even in "tier 3" cities -- is going up by an absolute minimum of 10-15%/yr (that's being conservative). So if you have money in China, of course you invest in housing. There's no property tax.

It helps a lot when the government refuses to register sales when the price is under the guidelines. If you put a price floor in the market can stay irrational even longer than normal during a bubble.

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#217

Post by barry-cotter »

bsanr2 wrote: post #138
jonfw wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, this doesn't work. Such a conspiracy would easily be covered by anti-monopoly laws in the US, I'm sure that there would be some equivalent law in Spain. The real reason buildings would stay vacant is either ownership attempting to charge above market for rent, or land speculators who are looking to hold and flip, without developing it enough so it can be used in the meantime.

How strictly and often are those laws enforced? I don't think anyone is suggesting that they gather together in a back-alley kitchen to talk shop with the Joker. Rather, it's not unreasonable to think that many of the people involved in an area's real estate market are connected, socially, and share their independent strategies in the course of socializing.

I doubt property ownership is concentrated enough for this to be possible. Tacit collusion can work with a duopoly but by the time you get to five participants in a market it doesn’t work unless cartel agreements are legally enforceable and I doubt there are less than 5,000 residential property owners in Barcelona.

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#218

Post by okr »

kabacha wrote: post #205

I live in one of such buildings in Thailand and I love it! I live in 30 store high new condo that is pretty much bought out by chinese investors and few seasonal tourists. There are probably 200 people living here and on my floor I have 1 neighbour. There's a pool, sauna and a gym in the building and with so few inhabitants you often have it all somewhat private. As an expat I definitely benefit from this. I've tried…

Is this not spooky? No noises? The drops of water somewhere? And you always start to wonder who this might be, who landed at my floor with the elevator? It actually triggers one of my childhood dreams. To be alone in a skyscraper. :)

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#219

Post by eric-hu »

kabacha wrote: post #205

I live in one of such buildings in Thailand and I love it! I live in 30 store high new condo that is pretty much bought out by chinese investors and few seasonal tourists. There are probably 200 people living here and on my floor I have 1 neighbour. There's a pool, sauna and a gym in the building and with so few inhabitants you often have it all somewhat private. As an expat I definitely benefit from this. I've tried…

I live in Bangkok. This sounds like it could be every other condo along the Sukhumvit BTS line.

EDIT: Also I'm always down to make new developer friends in the area. If you've got time for a chat, my email is in my profile.

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#220

Post by ende »

crazygringo wrote: post #201

In this conversation, it seems like people ignore the fact that there's a societal benefit to leaving buildings empty, at least in economic theory. Which is that it's keeping the space open for more productive use in the long term. Suppose you own a storefront or apartment that could fetch $5K/month right now, but you think it will fetch $10K/month in 3 years, and that leases are 10 years long. Well, the people/busin…

This line of reasoning is right up there with the devestation of war creating economic activity.
Post reply on HN