3 ms·

I'm actually quite sick of lots not being built to their potential and a chain of management firms selling properties to each other in schemes to foist the main

I'm actually quite sick of lots not being built to their potential and a chain of management firms selling properties to each other in schemes to foist the maintenance costs on to someone else. I think it would be in the public's interest to step in and provide baseline competition for the market. Not just at the bottom but at every layer of the stack. A series of non-profit entities should be made to keep competition even with each other, profits should be both limited and surpluses split between 'rainy day' investment funds, expanding the non-profit owned properties, and proper maintenance. Anything leftover should go towards reducing property taxes for everyone in the area. Anyone renting from such an entity should also be a "shareholder" in it, just like with credit unions.

jopsen 9y ago
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_cooperative https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_cooperative There are pros and cons. Sometimes buying in is really expensive, sometimes you can't sell your share, sometimes it losses value. Sometimes the share is really cheap it's equivalent to rent apartment. My student housing in Denmark was like this. Buy-in was 10$ or so, and you could never sell. But you get to vote on things like, representatives, higher rent, maintenance, etc :) If I had to rent long-term I would definitely prefer that.