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

Why Britain doesn’t build

worksinprogress.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 520 posts

Re: Why Britain doesn’t build

#471

Post by P_I_Staker »

lotsoweiners wrote: post #458
anthonypasq wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

classic hackernews shut-in that doesnt understand that people enjoy culture, i go to a concert/show at least once a month and they are the best things i spend my money on.

How does suburbia stop anyone from going to concerts? I live in a very suburban area and go to shows about once a month too. Sometimes those shows are downtown and sometimes they are in the burbs (sometimes the even further burbs).

Yeah, and depending on location, you might not even be that much further from the happening spots. In city it's like 20 min for me, vs. previously 30-40 minutes; sure it's both ways, but this isn't that crazy.

Also you have more people and diversity. If you hate your neighbor there's plenty of others. In a smaller society, if you don't get along with ~3-5 people your fucked.

Re: Why Britain doesn’t build

#472

Post by P_I_Staker »

pc86 wrote: post #278
P_I_Staker wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can have just as much fun at the TGI Friday's at your local strip mall as you can at the hippest restaurant no one else has ever heard of in Brooklyn. It's just a matter of who you spend that time with, and how you perceive that time, in the Stoic tradition. It's not just about restaurants. I'm not going to be able to go to concerts or events. There will be no specialized stores. Even in the example you gave, m…

I live in a suburb of a B-tier (at best) city, and have been to half a dozen concerts this year and at least two more coming up. Including several in objectively A-tier cities. The idea that if you live in a suburb you can no longer go to concerts or events or "specialized stores" whatever that means, is just ridiculous.

> "specialized stores" whatever that means

I coined the phrase, and am now not so sure myself. It doesn't really need to be that special, either. If you live in a small area you'll have eg. 1-5 stores.

There will be a big box supermarket, a local one, and maybe some other wildcard option. Then there will be a couple local stores (hardware, outdoors, etc.). However, if you want anything specific or just don't like the shop, you have to go to a different city.

I don't know if you've lived in a small town, but this would include things like electronic. With no Best Buy or Circuit City, you were stuck with Walmart, or a local shop for almost twice the price.

Re: Why Britain doesn’t build

#473

Post by winter_blue »

DeathArrow wrote: post #372
vogon_laureate wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s even worse because there’s an adult social care crisis, a pension crisis, and in some areas a rundown NHS and school system. So all the incentives are towards not just home ownership but also additional buy-to-let ownership so that those with the means can afford private health care, dentistry, school fees for their kids/grandkids, inheritance for the kids who are priced out of the market, and retirement. It’s a…

>It’s even worse because there’s an adult social care crisis, a pension crisis, and in some areas a rundown NHS and school system. So all the incentives are towards not just home ownership but also additional buy-to-let ownership so that those with the means can afford private health care, dentistry, school fees for their kids/grandkids, inheritance for the kids who are priced out of the market, and retirement. It's…

> If you incentivize people to develop themselves, acquire skills and knowledge, work and make kids, then they will be able to afford housing, medical care and pensions.

I don’t know if this was sarcasm, but this is the sort of absurd nonsense spouted by conservatives who’ve already gotten “theirs”.

Home prices that are astronomically high relative to average wages means that most people can’t afford to buy a home no matter what they do (other than becoming millionaires).

Re: Why Britain doesn’t build

#474

Post by winter_blue »

CaptainMarvel wrote: post #369
Lastodon wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is an unearned windfall, but people deserve to keep their homes. It bears noting that the issue is caused by property investors, not homeowners. How about we go for the individuals that own more than 3 properties and let grandma keep what she earned?

She may have earned the house to some degree (the article outlines a number of government subsidies which make this doubtful), but she definitely didn’t earn the land value increase. I’m reminded of this quote: > Landlords grow rich in their sleep without working, risking or economizing. The increase in the value of land, arising as it does from the efforts of an entire community, should belong to the community and n…

Yup. I think a 90% tax on real estate capital gains would be the solution. That would also disincentivize housing speculators et al.

In addition, a 90% tax on real estate income (rental income minus costs like mortgage, interest, maintenance, property taxes, etc) would also disincentivize people who buy properties just to rent them out.

Re: Why Britain doesn’t build

#475

Post by badpun »

CaptainMarvel wrote: post #369
Lastodon wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is an unearned windfall, but people deserve to keep their homes. It bears noting that the issue is caused by property investors, not homeowners. How about we go for the individuals that own more than 3 properties and let grandma keep what she earned?

She may have earned the house to some degree (the article outlines a number of government subsidies which make this doubtful), but she definitely didn’t earn the land value increase. I’m reminded of this quote: > Landlords grow rich in their sleep without working, risking or economizing. The increase in the value of land, arising as it does from the efforts of an entire community, should belong to the community and n…

> Landlords grow rich in their sleep without working, risking or economizing.

They are risking. Land value can go up or it can go down. It just has been mostly going up (in real terms) in the past decades, but it's far from certainty. You can lose money by investing in real estate, just like in everything else.

Re: Why Britain doesn’t build

#476

Post by dahwolf »

lmm wrote: post #301
dahwolf wrote: post #194

In the Netherlands we don't really have a big NIMBY issue and we still can't keep up supply with demand. Supply is complicated and not just restricted by zoning. One key thing to understand is that private companies build homes, not governments. And if it's not profitable to do so, it will simply stop. And if not at least 75% of the project is sold beforehand, the project is stopped altogether. And this is how our go…

> private companies build homes, not governments. And if it's not profitable to do so, it will simply stop. > There's an economic downturn and the building of new homes slows down or stops. This happened over here from 2008-2014 creating a massive backlog, in turn leading to a pricing boom in recent years. Ideally, you'd keep building during a downturn but nobody knows how as there's no buyers and it's too big to sub…

The answer is obvious: by investing in supply during a downturn you actively help lower prices, which is the opposite goal of investment.

Re: Why Britain doesn’t build

#477

Post by com2kid »

ilyt wrote: post #399
ExoticPearTree wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you think that? A well built house can last hundreds of years. Why should it not be an investment? It makes absolutely no sense to put any kind of money into something that one day will be worthless - like I read that it happens in Japan that on average a house is worthless after about 40 years.

While I wouldn't call it consumable, you do have to put money into it if you want to keep it working and in good state But the house part is not an investment. It's the land that appreciates in value, the value isn't in a bunch of bricks and boards that sits, it's the location of the piece of land.

The most highly valued residential land only has high value because of supporting infrastructure and other people.

Be it incredible schools, or a high quality of life from density, or proximity to culture, value comes from the things people build around houses, not the houses themselves.

Proof of this is trivial, huge mansions in the middle of nowhere cost less than a studio apartment in a desirable area.

Re: Why Britain doesn’t build

#478

Post by anotheruser13 »

bobthepanda wrote: post #228
prottog wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The tragedy is those who want to engage but can't. Due to registration requirements, ersatz poll taxes, difficulty of getting to and from poll sites or keeping tabs on the election calendar. I hear about this every now and then, but is it an issue in any real number? Maybe the problem of the "difficulty of getting to and from poll sites", which I can see arising due to the nature of this country being large, spread…

So things depend on the state, but IIRC some states have been way more brazen about others. For example, at one point a proposal was floated to force changes in Texas polling center distribution, but only in counties with over a million people, which was pretty nakedly partisan. https://www.texastribune.org/2021/05/23/texas-voting-polling...

Abbott, Paxton, and Patrick are the 3 horsemen of the "woke" apocalypse. They will do anything to prevent anyone who isn't an old, white, Xtian (those who profess to believe in Christ but do not follow his teachings) from voting, especially in Harris County.

https://www.texastribune.org/2023/06/01/harris-county-electi...

Re: Why Britain doesn’t build

#479

Post by Symbiote »

lotsoweiners wrote: post #456
alistairSH wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

… You can have just as much fun at the TGI Friday's at your local strip mall as you can at the hippest restaurant… Have you actually eaten at a TGIFridays? The food is awful. I suppose if the actual meal is completely secondary to your enjoyment of the experience, you might be right, but for me, eating out is as much for the food as the company.

In my early 20s I used to sit at the bar at TGIFridays 3-4 nights a week and play trivia with my girlfriend (now wife) and other friends. It was less than a 10 minute walk from our suburban condo and across the street from our work so we would have lots of coworkers stop in and hang out. I’d usually eat some of their shitty wings and fries but the experience was definitely hanging out, drinking, and playing trivia. I…

In a city, that 10 minute walk encompasses several bars and restaurants. Competition increases quality or decreases price.

Re: Why Britain doesn’t build

#480

Post by majormajor »

aetherson wrote: post #308
majormajor wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nope. It's to make money for the developers. Sure. Let's look a simple condo case: Developer pays X for property. Developer spends Y to build a building. Developer sells N units for Z. To make money, N Z has to be greater than X Y aka the total value of that parcel is now higher. > Reversed causation. It's literally just supply and demand. Places with high demand and not enough supply have growing property values.…

When you build new housing (as in, increase the number of units of housing that are available in total), you make your lot more valuable, which makes other lots less valuable. So a developer makes makes money by making their lot more valuable, but they do not "make real estate more valuable" generally. This is much like, you know, every other thing in the world. When a shoe manufacturer makes shoes, their shoes have…

That's purely short term.

Long term development is good for everybody's property values, in the exact opposite way that losing businesses and residents is bad for those property values. Phoenix vs Detroit, say.

"Demand" is a dynamic thing, it responds to changes in the built environment of a city, region, or nation. London didn't spring into being fully-formed and fully in-demand at today's levels. It found a virtuous (for property-owners financially) cycle of both increasing housing units and increasing population and demand for certain areas.

Post reply on HN