Live data from Hacker News

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

wsj.com

231–240 of 1001 posts

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

#231
paying 20-50% over asking price is an interesting move. To make money on that over-pricing you have to price rent accordingly. The only way to keep rents up is to limit inventory. If you can't stop the building of new houses, what's their out?

Sounds like a good time to exit Blackrock as your money manager?

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

#232
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Your liability has. If the interest rates goes back up to late 20th rates, your monthly payment isn't going to stay the same.

Only if its a variable rate loan

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

#234
post #107

Probably worth pointing out this twitter account is promoting the idea that the 2020 election was stolen. To me that casts suspicion on their other assertions.

I follow this account and others like it because it allows one to be exposed to things like the idea that COVID leaked from a lab a year ago. Skepticism is warranted in all cases, of course, but I think it's extremely healthy to keep in tune with a variety of subcommunities who are in and of themselves skeptics of many mainstream narratives.

That's a broken calendar is right once a year situation.

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

#235
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 recently went down the Geoist/LVT rabbit-hole myself. It strikes me as uniquely appealing across the political spectrum, since it reduces tax on wealth-creation AND redistributes wealth from the rich to the poor. Sadly, this very fact provokes enough superficial resistance to keep it out of the Overton window. Whenever it comes up, shouters on either side have plenty of ammo to blast it, saying things to the effect…

It's less to do with appeal to people on the other side of economic divides, and more to do with the impossibility of selling "the great thing is that it incentivises your next door neighbour to build a high rise" and "sure, your parents will have to downsize because their pension won't cover the tax burden of the house they spent their lifetime saving for, but on the other hand it's great how many investors and companies don't have to pay any tax at all" to the average voter, who cares a lot more about such concrete matters than handwavy claims about efficiency or equity.

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

#236
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Your liability has. If the interest rates goes back up to late 20th rates, your monthly payment isn't going to stay the same.

After all the adjustable rate issues from the last housing crisis, I believe most mortgages since them have been fixed rate. I don't care what interest rates do, my mortgage rate is never going up.

This touches on another point. For home owners like myself, inflation is a good thing as it makes my highest monthly expense relatively cheaper.

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

#237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve ranted about this before but CA Prop 13 not only makes housing a good investment, but one that you’re extremely incentivized to hold onto forever and never move. Two people can be living in houses next to each other valued around 1.5m, and one of them will be paying 1/10th the tax. If anyone wants to buy a house, they have to first be able to afford the property, so the barriers to entry are so much higher for t…

You’re saying that old people should be driven out of their houses because younger, richer people deserve to live in their houses. I’m sure your feelings will change as you get older.

Someone who owns a house in cali is a milionaire. I am not sure it applies to immigrant who just moved to California.

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

#238
Twitter is an awful blogging format when your message takes more than one tweet. It makes you blend in as well, making it easier for fake news to spread - you aren’t that different from a billion other accounts all saying striking things. At least with a blog, you have a more recognizable identity and the ability to write more than a few words at a time

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

#240

Things went off the rails at the end... > Well, the banks are controlled by and in bed with the same cabal buying everything up. You think this will be corrected by market forces when it is a financial and political pincher movement pushed by the same cabal that stole the 2020 election & hid COVID Truth? You are fucked. https://twitter.com/APhilosophae/status/1402449561864577024 IMO, weakens the entire 'thread' and m…

I was going to say, people need to learn how to make a point and leave out extraneous claims since those extraneous claims usually attack the credibility of their legitimate points ...

... but the urge to ignore my own advice is too strong since the extraneous claim is a huge head-scratcher. Doesn't this person realize the person who lost the election is a real estate developer? I realize this isn't the same thing as an investor, but it is close enough in this case.

Post reply on HN