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

Denver rent is back to 2022 prices after 20k new units hit the market

denverite.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 391 posts

Re: Denver rent is back to 2022 prices after 20k new units hit the market

#381

Post by _carbyau_ »

dastbe wrote: post #338
_carbyau_ wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So when a new home owner buys something and suddenly the value drops $100k and the bank wants the money I do feel slightly sorry for them. I feel a little sorry for them but they are not missing the money total of "the whole house". They can sell the house, have a shitty $100k debt, a tale of woe, and hopefully a better idea of how to go about spending money they didn't have. I feel there are too many people who "b…

we’re talking about wiping out most of the stored wealth of roughly a quarter of all homeowners here. and they cannot take that home with them when a new job opportunity comes up or worse get fired/sick. this sounds more like a suicide pact than a plan.

Is it great? No! It's certainly not an outcome I would wish for anyone. I'm not a monster.

But there's two things here:

1. allowing people freedom to make their own choices.

2. the dangers of borrowing large sums of money

Adding those two together in a free(for some notion of free) market means there will be losers. In this case, the outcome sucks but it isn't like they lost their life in a car crash.

If you start guaranteeing outcomes... that way madness lies.

Re: Denver rent is back to 2022 prices after 20k new units hit the market

#382

Post by _carbyau_ »

kelnos wrote: post #307
_carbyau_ wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, there are a few things here. Like if the bank want the house sold on the loan because the house value goes down even though the person with the loan is willing to continue servicing it - then that seems like an own goal for the bank. There are a variety of circumstances that can be dreamt up for either side of the equation. And I have no compassion for lenders either. As you say, maybe the mortgage/loan shoul…

> But ultimately "he who should have known" is the person asking for money to buy XYZ thing. A person should be responsible for their actions. I agree with this in principle, but the real world is messy, and many (most? all?) people end up having to make decisions in their lives where they maybe should know, but don't know everything they should. Perfect information is rarely a thing, and even if you have it, you nee…

If you want to make change but not make it scary - make it gradual. Which I suspect is going to be the outcome. I'm not sure what change in policy could suddenly produce a market surplus across a country in short order.

Fixing the housing crisis will be a generational task.

Re: Denver rent is back to 2022 prices after 20k new units hit the market

#383

Post by mindslight »

fragmede wrote: post #379
cdoctorow wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not incorrect to use this word colloquially. See this post: https://pluralistic.net/2024/10/14/pearl-clutching/#this-toi... Specifically: > The fact that a neologism is sometimes decoupled from its theoretical underpinnings and is used colloquially is a feature, not a bug. Many people apply the term "enshittification" very loosely indeed, to mean "something that is bad," without bothering to learn – or apply – t…

lol damn well I can't argue with the man who created the term! Still, it seems anti-intellectual to want words to have specific meaning and nuance and flavor, and for people to want to be able to have a common dictionary in order to have elevated discourse. In the days before the Internet, there was only space for a 30 second soundbite and that was the level of discourse. These days, we have Twitter and Substack, so…

To be clear here, as the person who originally used the term in this thread, in light of your grandstanding about "anti-intellectualism" - I did use the term for its general connotations, not just to mean "bad".

The healthcare industry is obviously not an online platform. And I would say it's being done to "lower costs" rather than "raise profits" (the two are often related, but not the same). But other than these, it strikes me as the same basic dynamic in a different industry. I spelled it out in a different comment:

> it's part of a continual gradual march down in quality/services to a captive customer base. Basically the opposite environment of innovation aiming to serve customers

The thing with online platforms is that they are new and fresh having been built out of whole cloth by subsidizing investments, allowing for multiple discrete enshittification steps as management focuses on one area after another. Doctorow:

> This is enshittification: surpluses are first directed to users; then, once they're locked in, surpluses go to suppliers; then once they're locked in, the surplus is handed to shareholders and the platform becomes a useless pile of shit.

Whereas the healthcare industry has been turning the screws for years. Now it's just an environment of making things worse wherever new ways to "control costs" can be created.

Re: Denver rent is back to 2022 prices after 20k new units hit the market

#384

Post by fragmede »

mindslight wrote: post #383
fragmede wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

lol damn well I can't argue with the man who created the term! Still, it seems anti-intellectual to want words to have specific meaning and nuance and flavor, and for people to want to be able to have a common dictionary in order to have elevated discourse. In the days before the Internet, there was only space for a 30 second soundbite and that was the level of discourse. These days, we have Twitter and Substack, so…

To be clear here, as the person who originally used the term in this thread, in light of your grandstanding about "anti-intellectualism" - I did use the term for its general connotations, not just to mean "bad". The healthcare industry is obviously not an online platform. And I would say it's being done to "lower costs" rather than "raise profits" (the two are often related, but not the same). But other than these, i…

thank you for the thoughtful reply! As someone not in the healthcare industry, I was quick to jump to conclusions

Re: Denver rent is back to 2022 prices after 20k new units hit the market

#385

Post by mindslight »

fragmede wrote: post #384
mindslight wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be clear here, as the person who originally used the term in this thread, in light of your grandstanding about "anti-intellectualism" - I did use the term for its general connotations, not just to mean "bad". The healthcare industry is obviously not an online platform. And I would say it's being done to "lower costs" rather than "raise profits" (the two are often related, but not the same). But other than these, i…

thank you for the thoughtful reply! As someone not in the healthcare industry, I was quick to jump to conclusions

It's not a question of if you are in the healthcare industry, but rather when you will be in the healthcare industry.

I too am not gainfully employed by the healthcare industry. I have just advocated many times for multiple family members. With the reflective hacker/systems mindset I've become painfully aware of the system's patterns of failure.

Re: Denver rent is back to 2022 prices after 20k new units hit the market

#386

Post by throwawayq3423 »

reactordev wrote: post #372
theoreticalmal wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Denver Metro Area has been booming for close to 20 years. It was one of the few localities that continued positive economic growth through the 2008 recession

Yes, because just 4 years later, everyone was high. It was the precursor to the green rush. Denver weathered the storm because we had an economic tsunami on our hands and it was going to come crashing at the ballot box. Well, it broke through. There was a huge influx of people from more expensive metros coming to Denver at that time. Then the housing went through the roof. Statistically it happened everywhere but I w…

I mean no offense, but you seem to be throwing a lot of different explanations at the wall to see what sticks.

Re: Denver rent is back to 2022 prices after 20k new units hit the market

#387

Post by harambae »

comte7092 wrote: post #169
JKCalhoun wrote: post #21

Is it wrong of me to be sad that it's rent and not home prices?

Denver home values peaked in May of 2022 and have yet to recover: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DNXRSA

What you're saying is technically true, but that graph shows the current prices very close to the all time high.

Re: Denver rent is back to 2022 prices after 20k new units hit the market

#388

Post by lenerdenator »

belmead wrote: post #41
lenerdenator wrote: post #5

Now do KC.

Howdy, fellow KC resident. They are still building apartment complexes in Lenexa, but they are all near the Public Market, so. Not exactly the cheaper side of things. South KC is growing, but mostly higher-end homes it seems.

I was thinking KCMO proper, I'd do about anything for a safe, affordable place near the state line in Jackson County.

Re: Denver rent is back to 2022 prices after 20k new units hit the market

#389

Post by pcai »

tptacek wrote: post #105
pcai wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you’re still missing the point - it’s NOT classic supply and demand because the mechanism by which that works is prices, and in many healthcare markets including the US — the buyer isn’t the payer, and shortages lead to rationing (via wait times) rather than increased prices, so often increasing supply doesn’t change prices even as it increases aggregate costs (because there’s still excess demand and rationin…

For this argument to work you have to believe that decreasing the price of service delivery wouldn't decrease the price of health insurance. Provider costs dominate US national health expenditure, like it's not even close; it's not a full order of magnitude difference but it's close to one.

> For this argument to work you have to believe that decreasing the price of service delivery wouldn't decrease the price of health insurance.

I think we are talking past each other. My argument is not that lower prices for medical services wouldn’t lead to lower insurance costs. My argument is specifically that increasing supply doesn’t necessarily lead to lower prices for medical services. It would be quite a finding if US cities with more doctors per capita have cheaper medical services but if anything the opposite is true

Re: Denver rent is back to 2022 prices after 20k new units hit the market

#390

Post by Supermancho »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #237
Supermancho wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> single family homes will continue to be bulldozed and replaced with 8 story wooden boxes, owned by national corporate landlords of course > Source? Why of course? Maybe I'm talking past someone, but the concept that was being described is self-evident. So, I'll just say this isn't a controversial take, from an urban planning standpoint. It's been demonstrated for hundreds of years (albeit, slightly different wealt…

> the concept that was being described is self-evident. So, I'll just say this isn't a controversial take, from an urban planning standpoint. It's been demonstrated for hundreds of years National corporate landlords haven't been buying up anything for hundreds of years.

I'll respectfully disagree and go with history here. "corporate" is the modern term for a conglomerate of merchant parties who capitalize on buying up real estate in urban centers. The mechanisms are similar between Roman Senators (google: Roman Senators and Merchants - land ownership), Feudal families, the Dutch/English merchants of the 1800s. Historically all the same pattern of wealth concentration by land aggregation. All modern cities evolve this way. I'm not sure how you've missed it.
Post reply on HN