961–970 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Netherlands is a different kind of environment because there is a calculated policy of not doing anything that could reduce home values. This trickles through all policies for any action that could meaningfully solve the housing crisis.
Well it’s basically illegal to save money so it’s no wonder people use their house as an investment
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why should housing be an investment?
Because we live in a democracy and voters want housing to be an investment because they own housing
In the US the majority of voters just voted for a racist, homophobic pedophile convicted felon.That doesn’t mean everyone should shrug and say “it’s the will of the people”
I refuse to believe you would have this attitude if you and your family had to rent drinking water while people profited wildly from it.
The situation is unacceptable and needs to change, irrelevant of what certain people want.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because we live in a democracy and voters want housing to be an investment because they own housing
The majority of voters would vote to make income tax zero, that doesn’t mean we should accept that simply because the majority wants it. In the US the majority of voters just voted for a racist, homophobic pedophile convicted felon.That doesn’t mean everyone should shrug and say “it’s the will of the people” I refuse to believe you would have this attitude if you and your family had to rent drinking water while peopl…
> The majority of voters would vote to make income tax zero
Im not sure this is true. Most people recognize the taxes are needed for the government to provide services.
> That doesn’t mean everyone should shrug and say “it’s the will of the people”
This is the reality though, it doesnt matter that you or I disagree. Trump is the legitimate president even if he's a racist, homophobic pedophile convicted felon.
Please bear in mind when you discuss "rent control" in the USA you really do mean the version you see in your locale. The idea that rent control sui generis failed worldwide is (in my personal opinion) a stretch. Public housing also has many models. State owned. State funded but via cooperatives. Part state. state assisted co-buy. There's lots of models and so it is also a bit bogus to talk as if public housing has o…
Can you cite a version of it that worked?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If investment companies that already own tens of thousands of homes buy them and keep increasing the rent, the problem has not been solved.
You literally didn't read the article. Build more housing.
Please bear in mind when you discuss "rent control" in the USA you really do mean the version you see in your locale. The idea that rent control sui generis failed worldwide is (in my personal opinion) a stretch. Public housing also has many models. State owned. State funded but via cooperatives. Part state. state assisted co-buy. There's lots of models and so it is also a bit bogus to talk as if public housing has o…
> Please bear in mind when you discuss "rent control" in the USA you really do mean the version you see in your locale. The idea that rent control sui generis failed worldwide is (in my personal opinion) a stretch. Can you cite a version of it that worked?
The thing is, there is no neutral arbiter. The people who say it failed, are systems level reviewers with overal economic takes. The people (like me) who say it succeeded are looking at sub-cohorts of the housing economy who otherwise would be homeless.
Success is complicated.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
2-3% is a margin of error compared to 20-40+% y/o/y growth. That means the influx ceased, some left, some had babies. Meanwhile housing was built. Of course rents will crash if everyone anticipates 20-40% growth and it’s suddenly 0 . Let’s see in a few years if the pricing trend continues downward or upward. If it’s downward, yes we’ve solved the rent problem by “building”. If it’s upward, as it has been, it’s not ju…
> Let’s see in a few years if the pricing trend continues downward or upward This was the argument of the tobacco companies in the 1980s. This experiment has been run many, many times and only had one outcome. Overwhelming housing markets with a supply influx absolutely works. It cuts against ideology, however, so you’ll always have folks who want to wait for more data while properties appreciate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of the things I like about the reporting in this Austin article, is they break down by building class. In Melbourne I've never found a good source for this, only general averages; and my suspicions are that we just build shitboxes and claim the rent is lower on average, capturing something like shrinkflation rather than affordability.
You should be able to identify properties and track them over time; and then even if you argue that "brand new condo" vs "same condo 10/20/30 years later" aren't directly comparable; well you can start to compare other metrics.
But that's just the few I've looked through, not statistically significant.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problems that rent control creates are far smaller than the problems that exist without it. To start - your 'very first example' is not even really 'a problem'. 'Without rent control' - you get kicked out of your abode every few years if your salary doesn't keep up with housing inflation. With rent control, you have the option of 'having a home; you decide when you want to leave (for the most part). The answer to…
> To start - your 'very first example' is not even really 'a problem'. Yes, it is. Anywhere with significant and strong rent control results in a large number of people who simply cannot move. Look, rent control is better than no rent control but it address the symptom not the problem. The real problem is that rents shouldn't significantly outpace inflation. In a better world, you should be able to easily move becaus…
Having the choice when to move if the far, far more ideal scenario - there is not even a discussion.
This is not Apples to Oranges, it's Apple to Bag of Apples.
Rent Control gives people the option to stay, yes, with the realization that it may be more costly to move later.
So 'no rent control' is a horrible situation, with rent control it's a workable situation.
"l not find in any American city, especially one with rent control, where tenants do not absolutely hate their landlords as the general rule. What are you smoking?"
That is a function of garbage culture and total social break down - not rent control.
I live in an area where everything is rent controlled in entire region - and we dont have that.
This is tantamount to the "We need guns everywhere to stay safe!" argument so many people make because they can't wrap their heads around a community of people that just don't act crazy and violent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well it’s basically illegal to save money so it’s no wonder people use their house as an investment
Illegal?