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

Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

nltimes.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 598 posts

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#501

Post by colechristensen »

missedthecue wrote: post #483
colechristensen wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the housing market is so inefficient that removing a significant source of demand won’t change prices? That is an exceptional claim that requires exceptional evidence.

New Zealand banned foreign buyers a couple years ago and house prices are up 20-50% nationwide since then. https://i.stuff.co.nz/life-style/homed/119636052/foreign-buy... The problem is that people chronically overestimate the number of foreign buyers in the market. I can't find data for the Netherlands online, but for other western nations, it is around four or five percent of demand. Removing that will have essenti…

Foreign buyers isn’t generally a problem on a national level but on a city or neighborhood level where specific areas are targets.

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#502

Post by dmje »

laurent92 wrote: post #444
sideshowb wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amusing you equate democracy with the English vote. Sincerely, Scotland, Wales and NI

I’m equating democracy with listening to the most numerous. You have been thoroughly defeated with 3 blatant-majority votes in 4 years. If you don’t like it, you were never in favour of democracy, and if you are not in solidarity with your English mates, tell me about solidarity with an entire continent. Name a single country that succeeded to leave EU without retaliation from said EU and I’ll eat my hat. EU is not a…

Personally I see the b/s scaremongering, the likes of the Farage bus and the hateful rhetoric of the Daily Heil as the "plain sight manipulation" in creating a manufactured problem with the EU which simply never existed, but each to their own.

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#503

Post by missedthecue »

colechristensen wrote: post #501
missedthecue wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

New Zealand banned foreign buyers a couple years ago and house prices are up 20-50% nationwide since then. https://i.stuff.co.nz/life-style/homed/119636052/foreign-buy... The problem is that people chronically overestimate the number of foreign buyers in the market. I can't find data for the Netherlands online, but for other western nations, it is around four or five percent of demand. Removing that will have essenti…

Foreign buyers isn’t generally a problem on a national level but on a city or neighborhood level where specific areas are targets.

Even still, home prices have risen the fastest in Auckland.

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#504

Post by 6510 »

gruez wrote: post #391
kingludite wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get how people can keep saying this. Is it that people are told banks lend out money from depositors in school? Anyway, if you sign a contract that says you shall pay me every month for 30 years OR ELSE I get to sell your house (and whatever else you own, seize your income etc) then the document with your signature IS the value created and I can sell that document for what it is worth. So the bank creates mon…

>>Charging 0% interest means the bank is losing money. > I don't get how people can keep saying this. Is it that people are told banks lend out money from depositors in school? They don't? Where is the money from? Due to complicated reasons (ie. bundling mortgages into mortgage backed securities and selling them), it might not be the case that the mortgage issued by Bank A is funded by Bank A's depositors, but it is…

> Where is the money from?

https://youtu.be/b6_SLwReMqo

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#505

Post by silexia »

afuchs wrote: post #477
makomk wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, the British press and all the wealthy people with second homes still have Brexit as a scapegoat for why cafes and shops in tourist destinations can't find staff. Never mind the fact that AirBNB and second homes have pushed up house prices and rents to the point that it's impossible to live there on the kind of pay those jobs have, according to the media it's all the fault of Brexit driving away the for…

There's a dead comment later in this thread which using directed abusive language towards another commenter while linking to a Louis Rossmann video. The video [1] was interesting, although the dead comment seemed to completely ignore the video's [1] main point, where Louis talks about a hypothesis [2] where in New York City there may be an incentive structure between real estate investors and banks which is creating…

I am not a housing investor, but I see many misguided articles claiming housing investors are driving prices up.

The factors that primarily control pricing in the housing market are supply and demand.

In Seattle, London, Los Angeles and elsewhere demand has risen steadily but supply has not. This causes prices to increase sharply.

The solution is to increase the housing supply. If the government removes regulations preventing developers from building new houses and apartments, many more will be built and prices will drop.

Many young people prefer to live in inexpensive high density housing. I remember looking at renting an apartment without a kitchen (there was a big shared kitchen for the whole floor) and without its own bathroom in my early twenties. Monthly rental price on this is around $300 per month as compared to $1,600 for a single bedroom apartment. Why aren’t there more of these? Government regulation prevents them from being built.

Government permitting processes take years to go through and cost millions of dollars for big new apartment buildings or for residential developments. If we lighten / remove these regulations, housing supply will decrease dramatically.

If you don’t want housing investors bidding up housing prices, then allow the supply to continuously increase. This will continuously drive down prices and no investors will want to buy.

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#507

Post by avsteele »

imtringued wrote: post #475
logicchains wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most leftists are driven by envy; they see someone else has something they can't afford, and they feel rage. They can't afford multiple houses, so seeing people with multiple houses triggers this feeling. Fundamentally it's because they're so ego-driven they can't accept the market rewards people fairly, because doing so would require accepting that someone else deserves those houses more than they do.

I want to become a landlords and I do not want to think about the moral implications of rent seeking. If the government simply taxed the unfair gains I received through rent seeking then I would have no moral qualms about other landlords. I would be very happy to pay land value taxes if that is what it takes to make free market capitalism fair again. I do not envy Jeff Bezoz for owning $200 billion in stocks. I do no…

This doesn't make much sense to me.

Considering the high degree of competition in ~all rental markets, claims of monopoly are unfounded.

Returns on capital for land-owning businesses aren't higher than other sectors.

In the US in particular, we have ludicrisly large amounts of space. Even in our most expensive areas we don't approach the density of places like Hong Kong. Scarcity, as usual, is due to government fiat.

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#508

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

makomk wrote: post #106
ed_blackburn wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another Cornishman here (Par). The financial destitution and how much harder they have to work for the same things I do in the South East is unsustainable. Cornwall has Luther to the right politically and that’s because there’s been some useful scapegoats. Now those scapegoats have been slain and things are getting worse not better I hope we’ll see policies that are focused on root cause issues instead of ideology (l…

Unfortunately, the British press and all the wealthy people with second homes still have Brexit as a scapegoat for why cafes and shops in tourist destinations can't find staff. Never mind the fact that AirBNB and second homes have pushed up house prices and rents to the point that it's impossible to live there on the kind of pay those jobs have, according to the media it's all the fault of Brexit driving away the for…

AirBNB, second homes, and rentals aren't pushing up rents and house prices even a fraction as much as central banks artificially lowering interest rates, zoning laws, and NIMBYism.

Population growth and lower family formation rates - which is hard to blame on anyone but women actually having a choice for their own lives - are much bigger reasons for price increases than AirBNB and second homes pretty much everywhere outside of the most touristy vacation destinations.

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#509

Post by 734129837261 »

TacticalCoder wrote: post #302
734129837261 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Designations. That's how. Some houses are built and intended to be rented out to people. These houses are constructed entirely by companies (or people) for that purpose alone. Other houses are meant to be for purchase, and purchase only. If you purchase a house like this and then rent it out, that should be considered breaking the intended designation. So if you as an individual want to own multiple houses to rent ou…

> These houses are constructed entirely by companies (or people) for that purpose alone. So private companies are allowed to engage in rent-seeking behavior but individuals aren't?

People can make companies. You know that, right?

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#510

Post by bdowling »

afuchs wrote: post #477
makomk wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, the British press and all the wealthy people with second homes still have Brexit as a scapegoat for why cafes and shops in tourist destinations can't find staff. Never mind the fact that AirBNB and second homes have pushed up house prices and rents to the point that it's impossible to live there on the kind of pay those jobs have, according to the media it's all the fault of Brexit driving away the for…

There's a dead comment later in this thread which using directed abusive language towards another commenter while linking to a Louis Rossmann video. The video [1] was interesting, although the dead comment seemed to completely ignore the video's [1] main point, where Louis talks about a hypothesis [2] where in New York City there may be an incentive structure between real estate investors and banks which is creating…

> The hypothesis speculates that, if a building's assessed value is lowered, it could trigger conditions in loan contracts that penalize the landlord or investor.

This is the issue exactly. A commercial mortgage lender will insist on a certain maximum Loan-to-Value ratio. The value of the property is directly related to the long-term income that it generates (i.e., the net present value of all future cash flows). If the amounts of cash flows go down, then the value of the property goes down and the loan-to-value ratio goes up. In a commercial loan, the lender can often call the loan due at certain times during the term of the loan for any reason. One big reason to do so is if the loan-to-value ratio goes up beyond the level that the lender was comfortable with. Refinancing in such a circumstance could be very expensive. Thus, it may make more sense for an owner to keep a property vacant and lose money temporarily than to take on a tenant at a lower rent and possibly cause the lender to call the loan.

Post reply on HN