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

The elderly are becoming homeless at a rate not seen since the Great Depression

moneywise.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 1001 posts

Re: The elderly are becoming homeless at a rate not seen since the Great Depression

#491

Post by coryrc »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #404
zemvpferreira wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a bizarre idea contrary to how many housing affordability crisis were actually solved in the past. Would SF's housing prices go down if you were to build 10,000 new units? You're right, probably not that much. Would SF's housing prices go down if you were to build 1M new units? No doubt. Shenzhen grew from 100,000 people in the 1980s to 13M now with no housing affordability crisis...by building. The whole pea…

Shenzhen and Guangzhou are some of the least affordable cities in the world when it comes to housing prices. Yes, rents are actually not that bad and many units are vacant being just used as investments, but the cost to buy is astronomical given the Chinese housing bubble. Tokyo is an example where houses are torn down every 39 years so a new one can be built. Also, given the lack of population growth in Japan as a w…

Houses often are torn down, but not apartments.

Re: The elderly are becoming homeless at a rate not seen since the Great Depression

#492

Post by DakotaR »

macNchz wrote: post #377
spir wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You only perceive corporate landlords as the greater problem because we're not living in the counterfactual reality where there are millions of new apartments that are inexpensive, tiny, safe, quiet, modern, clean, dignified, and well-located. In pretty much every major city in North America, it is illegal or there is too much red tape to build the affordable housing people actually want. Why is it that living in a t…

SROs used to exist to fill that gap, but were largely banned over the last hundred years. The stupid thing is that now they basically exist again in the form of regular hotels, except city governments are the ones paying full price to house otherwise homeless people.

I rented for a few months in a motel converted to studios/section 8, great niche and I wish it was more common

Re: The elderly are becoming homeless at a rate not seen since the Great Depression

#493

Post by shrimp_emoji »

ohyes wrote: post #235
BytesAndGears wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s totally relevant because someone in their 20s might be able to live with their parents, or has multiple roommates etc. The amount of money that they need is much less than that of someone more established. It is a really interesting contrast though, that in Amsterdam where I now live (and many other parts of Europe), this divide doesn’t exist as strongly. We have a perfectly happy and healthy ~40 year old woman…

And then people wonder why none of us are having families. You’re too poor in your 20s, then you aren’t able to biologically by the time you’re in your 40s. But by then everyone in their 40s has the “I’ve got mine” mentality so nothing changes. We live in the stupidest timeline.

I don't wonder why people aren't having families because the reason is obviously that they don't want to.

It's not because things are worse now than ever in human history; that's pure rationalization/delusion/cope.

Re: The elderly are becoming homeless at a rate not seen since the Great Depression

#494

Post by belligeront »

cogman10 wrote: post #478
spir wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You only perceive corporate landlords as the greater problem because we're not living in the counterfactual reality where there are millions of new apartments that are inexpensive, tiny, safe, quiet, modern, clean, dignified, and well-located. In pretty much every major city in North America, it is illegal or there is too much red tape to build the affordable housing people actually want. Why is it that living in a t…

What government policy would allow for a 2k apartment building and not a $500 apartment building? I just don't buy this argument. The reason there's not a $500 apartments being built is because by expanding the residence out just a tiny bit you can charge $2000 for the same space that 2 $500 apartments would occupy. I'm seeing this play out where I live that has practically no zoning laws or regulations (LOTS of buil…

Allowing SROs, which have been banned in most cities.

Re: The elderly are becoming homeless at a rate not seen since the Great Depression

#495

Post by pierat »

jpadkins wrote: post #401
pierat wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ive seen your Reaganite "the government and regulations are the enemy" comments since Ive been born, and it was crap then and it's crap now. In fact, dereg is how we've gotten to this point. Housing has been turned from "a place to live" to a "place we can extract rents to make bank". And with the nature of landlording, the rents are priced to "mortgage+profit", so they get their mortgage paid on our backs and grow t…

> Time to de-profit-ize housing. Can you cite an example of where this policy has worked out well? It seems counter intuitive because removing the profit incentive seems like it would remove investments + labor and therefore reduce housing construction.

"Can you do the dirty job of recreating the housing market, and cite your sources in what amounts to a blog post?"

Sure. Let me get right on that, after I get elected to be a Congresscritter.

Re: The elderly are becoming homeless at a rate not seen since the Great Depression

#496

Post by dghlsakjg »

ryandrake wrote: post #440
spir wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You only perceive corporate landlords as the greater problem because we're not living in the counterfactual reality where there are millions of new apartments that are inexpensive, tiny, safe, quiet, modern, clean, dignified, and well-located. In pretty much every major city in North America, it is illegal or there is too much red tape to build the affordable housing people actually want. Why is it that living in a t…

What specific government policy is causing developers to only build $2k+/mo rentals? You can't just vaguely say "government" is at fault without connecting the dots. This seems more like the market's fault. If homes in a particular area are going for $2k/mo, then that's what they are going for. If this is the government's fault, are you proposing price controls?

There are a ton of requirements placed on what can even qualify as housing.

To stick close to the example, rooming houses (SROs) are effectively illegal in most cities these days. You simply can't have a commercial venture that rents out cheap barebones bedrooms with shared bathrooms. That's due to regulations that were designed to get rid of rooming houses. Bedrooms are also required by law to have a window and closet with doors in many places.

I'll admit that living in a place that looks like a college dorm isn't the best thing, but we are at the point where there is no middle ground between an apartment and a tent on the street.

Re: The elderly are becoming homeless at a rate not seen since the Great Depression

#497

Post by ryandrake »

BytesAndGears wrote: post #454
ryandrake wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What specific government policy is causing developers to only build $2k+/mo rentals? You can't just vaguely say "government" is at fault without connecting the dots. This seems more like the market's fault. If homes in a particular area are going for $2k/mo, then that's what they are going for. If this is the government's fault, are you proposing price controls?

You can’t built a “$2k rental”. You can only build a rental that someone will pay for. Landlords are building luxury housing because it’s the only thing that’s profitable right now due to the immensely ridiculous laws that don’t help people. But if an apartment building popped up in downtown SF charging $800/mo, it’s not like only the low income people would live there. Many people living in $3000/mo apartments also…

> You can’t built a “$2k rental”. You can only build a rental that someone will pay for. Landlords are building luxury housing because it’s the only thing that’s profitable right now due to the immensely ridiculous laws that don’t help people.

That's what I'm asking: Exactly which laws? Nobody seems to be specific.

Re: The elderly are becoming homeless at a rate not seen since the Great Depression

#498

Post by bombcar »

sokoloff wrote: post #423
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you are claiming that if SF becomes as dense as Manhattan, it will be as cheap as Manhattan? Or maybe Hong Kong’s density and housing affordability is the target here? The ideal situation is Tokyo, where a lack of culture in speculating on housing coupled with population decreases leads (going down in the metro area for the last three years) to housing affordability.

I'm claiming that the balance of supply and demand affects housing prices. If you increase the supply by enough, that will tip the balance to where the market clearing price will go down.

The real underlying problem is that you have X million people who want to live in the quaint version of San Francisco. It's literally impossible; the quaint version dies at some point as more and more people are piled in, even if the resulting city is world-class and quite desirable.

Just like the entirety of Los Angeles couldn't move to Santa Barbara without Santa Barbara being changed forever.

The closest reasonable equivalent we can do is maintain the quaint "old town" and build a "real city" around it where people actually live and work, and the old town remains as a tourist destination, basically.

This is the case in much of Europe. The Paris you visit and the Paris people live in are often mixed, but they're noticeably different.

Rapid mass transit to city centers can hide the distinction.

Re: The elderly are becoming homeless at a rate not seen since the Great Depression

#499

Post by svnt »

spir wrote: post #234
escapedmoose wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Among my friends seeking to buy houses, the greater problem is the ability of large companies to buy up whatever is on the market, which they then immediately turn into a rental. It’s nearly impossible to compete with a company who will pay $50k over asking price, in cash, for the house you’re trying to get. Comparatively, immigrants don’t have the purchasing power to compete, so saying they’re the problem is a weird…

You only perceive corporate landlords as the greater problem because we're not living in the counterfactual reality where there are millions of new apartments that are inexpensive, tiny, safe, quiet, modern, clean, dignified, and well-located. In pretty much every major city in North America, it is illegal or there is too much red tape to build the affordable housing people actually want. Why is it that living in a t…

It is counterfactual in the literal sense. It is entirely possible that there are no real prices below $2k in urban centers because of demand and constrained supply. It is entirely possible that getting below this would result in a return to conditions where people were regularly dying in fires and building collapse.

We have plenty of examples of what happens in your fantasy land, you just choose to reason from ideology instead of researching them.

Re: The elderly are becoming homeless at a rate not seen since the Great Depression

#500

Post by voakbasda »

ryandrake wrote: post #440
spir wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You only perceive corporate landlords as the greater problem because we're not living in the counterfactual reality where there are millions of new apartments that are inexpensive, tiny, safe, quiet, modern, clean, dignified, and well-located. In pretty much every major city in North America, it is illegal or there is too much red tape to build the affordable housing people actually want. Why is it that living in a t…

What specific government policy is causing developers to only build $2k+/mo rentals? You can't just vaguely say "government" is at fault without connecting the dots. This seems more like the market's fault. If homes in a particular area are going for $2k/mo, then that's what they are going for. If this is the government's fault, are you proposing price controls?

Zoning and building codes drive up the cost of new construction. The inventory of buildable properties in cities is artificially scarce due to zoning restrictions, and that scarcity drives up the base cost per square foot. Even with land in hand, you can’t build just anything without meeting an insane number of code requirements, all of which add real costs that drive up the minimum rent amount necessary to provide a positive ROI.

Multistory buildings with running water, electricity, heat, and other “basic” requirements are expensive to engineer and build. No one wants to build something and then lose money, but that’s where we are at with new construction.

Make no mistake, it is entirely the government’s fault. It is illegal everywhere to build something that costs less.

Post reply on HN