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

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

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

801–810 of 1001 posts

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

#801

Post by dnautics »

larsiusprime wrote: post #640
dnautics wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't think geoism is just naive? This idea that the state can magically assign a value to property and not have it go sideways for the politically disenfranchised (the poor) is pure fantasy. If you haven't gone through the process of buying a house. I suggest trying it (especially during a frothy market), and each step of the way stop and think, "how would geoism get turned around to screw the poor".

This is a fully general refutation of ANY system, because rich people game every system, including and especially the current one. Why should the current one be favored? The trick is to find a system that, despite attempts to game it, has an incentive structure that isn't already explicitly tilted in favor of the rich. Geoism is one such system.

I aver that it's more difficult for a rich person to game a decentralized system than a centralized one. A land tax necessarily concentrates an important axis of power into the hands of fewer people.

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

#802

Post by dnautics »

_greim_ wrote: post #610
dnautics wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't think geoism is just naive? This idea that the state can magically assign a value to property and not have it go sideways for the politically disenfranchised (the poor) is pure fantasy. If you haven't gone through the process of buying a house. I suggest trying it (especially during a frothy market), and each step of the way stop and think, "how would geoism get turned around to screw the poor".

I'll give the standard reply here: this sounds mainly like a criticism of the current system. Are you specifically proposing some loophole in geoism that could be gamed in such a way to make things worse for the poor, beyond how things stand in the current system? Or is this more of a "things will end up badly for the poor no matter what we do" kind of sentiment? I can certainly understand that, but it isn't a good e…

It concentrates an important axis of power (setting prices on a rivalrous good) into the hands of the few. That is necessarily worse for the disenfranchised. I thought that was clear from my comment, I guess not.

My statement is not one of apathy, but a prediction of worse comparative outcomes with mechanistic backing.

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

#803

Post by recursive »

WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #504
recursive wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd give up housing before food. There's a limit to how high that percentage can be.

> I'd give up housing before food. Lack of food can be fixed in a day. Lack of housing can be impossible to overcome ever.

I don't get this.

Both things could be fixed in a day. Also, both of them could be impossible to overcome ever. What's the distinction you're trying to draw. If it comes down to an acute situation where I had to choose, I (and most I think) would choose to eat. I understand in the real world, there probably wouldn't be such a clear choice.

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

#804

Post by nradov »

Telemakhos wrote: post #544
maxsilver wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Everybody opposed the rezoning and fought to defeat it. Why? That's kind of an important point. For example, unless this is NYC or similar, 49 townhomes is going to need a minimum of at least 110 parking spots (just to hold the occupants alone, assuming no one ever has guests ever). A realistic parking minimum should be 2.5 spots per townhouse. A lot of builders outsource their pollution to the local neighborhood,…

The developer wants to build the densest housing in four counties with little parking, and nobody has asked the real question: is this planned as Section 8/affordable housing? It sounds like it. Section 8 is guaranteed income for the landlord and probably a headache for the neighbors, especially if they had no poverty in the area before. A very similar situation happened in my rural village, where a developer decided…

I don't believe you. Civil court judges don't have the authority to order elected politicians to undergo racial sensitivity training. Citation needed

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

#805

Post by lliamander »

refulgentis wrote: post #386
lliamander wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was from a series of predictions made by the WEF in 2016 about life in 2030[0]. The claim of many is that the WEF wants to bring about a world in which the vast majority of people don't have ownership. Reuters "fact checks"[1] this claim by saying that it was merely a prediction, and that it isn't actually a goal listed on their website. I find the fact check unpersuasive. The WEF says "you will be happy" about no…

It feels like this analysis is missing something, ex. have you had any property rights taken away in the ensuing 5 years? If discourse hinges on a 2 minute YouTube video and refusing to accept any downplaying of it, what hope does discourse have? There's approximately infinite two minute YouTube videos edit: -4 in 7 minutes, anyone have tips on exactly how you are allowed to discuss any of this without wholesale acce…

> edit: -4 in 7 minutes, anyone have tips on exactly how you are allowed to discuss any of this without wholesale accepting it?

It is against the rules to complain about downvotes.

Someone else disagreed without receiving similar downvotes.

Your downvotes are probably because of statements like "and refusing to accept any downplaying of it". It's not that I would refuse to accept any downplaying, just that I don't find the ones offered to be persuasive.

If you focus on attacking the argument at hand, rather than on the mental state or character of those you are arguing with, you will have more success.

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

#806

Post by dcolkitt »

ivalm wrote: post #730
dcolkitt wrote: post #609

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, what? What business is it of the local government? Why can't we just let consenting adults make their own personal decisions about the details of the housing and parking they choose to live in? Some people may only need limited parking. Some people may not need any parking. Maybe they're making a mistake and will regret it. Maybe not. Maybe nobody wants that, in which case the developer will pay the cost. Who car…

Because there are external costs. The “consenting adults” narrative is false. Not enough parking means people living there will use street parking in nearby areas affecting the residents of those communities. This happens all the time.

This problem only exists because street parking is heavily subsidized at below market rates. In urban cores, street parking is often 90% cheaper than garage parking.

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

#807

Post by _greim_ »

dnautics wrote: post #802
_greim_ wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll give the standard reply here: this sounds mainly like a criticism of the current system. Are you specifically proposing some loophole in geoism that could be gamed in such a way to make things worse for the poor, beyond how things stand in the current system? Or is this more of a "things will end up badly for the poor no matter what we do" kind of sentiment? I can certainly understand that, but it isn't a good e…

It concentrates an important axis of power (setting prices on a rivalrous good) into the hands of the few. That is necessarily worse for the disenfranchised. I thought that was clear from my comment, I guess not. My statement is not one of apathy, but a prediction of worse comparative outcomes with mechanistic backing.

Who are "the few" in this case?

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

#808

Post by kody »

quadrifoliate wrote: post #794
spoonjim wrote: post #547

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After I spent my entire net worth plus a good chunk of my future net worth on this house you can be damn right I’m going to vote to protect its value.

It is worthwhile to recognize that there is nothing unusual in this response, many homeowners feel this way. But then by same token we can also move to justifying other things, like not hiring people without CS degrees (I spent $xxx,xxx on my CS degree, I want to protect its value), only hiring other MBAs, only hiring people with prior experience in tech companies etc. – which can perpetuate and amplify inequality in…

There's "wanting to protect the value of your home" and there's "I'm going to vote NIMBY/BANANA and screw everybody else out of a place to live because I decided to 'invest' all my money in this house and expect it to be a nest egg that catapults me out of the working class." It sounds like the parent is in the latter category.

Is the problem "losing value in my house" or "not realizing astronomical gains like my peers"? And if building much-needed housing does decrease your house's value then hey, maybe your house was overvalued at the price you paid and you made a bad 'investment'. Why punish everyone else and artificially strangle housing supply to cover your bad decision?

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

#809

Post by nradov »

groone wrote: post #793
mattmcknight wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not really market oriented, it's tragedy of the commons oriented, as developers will build the cheapest thing they can on the premise that new residents can use existing parking, resulting in a reduction of value for others utilizing those commons. By not having parking minimums, it allows developers to pass those costs onto surrounding residents. There are townhouse neighborhoods near me with nearly impassable…

Another solution is robotaxis. If ridehailing becomes easily affordable You will have your nice neighborhood back. Robotaxis can pick you up in a minute and go to park and recharge in some distant multi story parking.

That is a science fiction fantasy, not something we can plan on in any reasonable time frame.

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

#810

Post by rwcarlsen »

davidw wrote: post #125

Here's why investors buy up houses: they know your neighbors will do the dirty work of artificially constraining the housing supply, which makes it a good investment. Here's one who comes right out and explains this: > Meanwhile, local opposition to building is so commonplace and the approval process so cumbersome, time consuming, and expensive, even when a proposed project complies entirely with requirements, approv…

I've been trying to build a house for myself. Going through all the hoops is not only cumbersome and expensive - but nearly impossible. I've run into legal tiff's between the county and nearby city. The city wants me to pay $40,000 for a sewer hookup for a single family dwelling when the sewer line is literally right along the road in front of where we will build the house. This is because the city has a beef to pick with the county and they are charging me based on the size of my parcel rather than the number of hookups I need. My house is actually in the county (but in the city impact zone). So now I'm spending my time combing through legal records, state supreme court case rulings, etc. all relevant to my situation to try to get things resolved. Literally everything is a fight. I even had to push and fight to get a build-right for the parcel - because it is currently zoned ag - which my country requires a max house density of 40 acres per house. I could rezone - but that would require me to get permission of all my neighbors to rezone so that my new residential zoning would be contiguous with existing residential zoning. I've had to fight to get permission to have an arch/rainbow driveway. Then I wanted to have an accessory dwelling, but ag zoning doesn't allow this either - never mind that this is totally allowed for all residential zoning types in the county and nearby city. And on and on. I've spent several hundreds of hours and tens of thousands of dollars trying to jump through all these hoops - and I haven't even started building anything yet!
Post reply on HN