4 ms·
I don't get it. When prices are high, it's a housing crisis. When prices are going down, it's a housing crisis. It's almost as if news articles just need to be
by baursak 9y ago
I don't get it. When prices are high, it's a housing crisis. When prices are going down, it's a housing crisis. It's almost as if news articles just need to be written regardless of the reason.
- spand 9y agoThere is a third option you know.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- adventured 9y agoThat's because those two market situations are the most concerning. Prices haven't just been high, they've been extremely high. You're not presenting all scenarios however, there's the vast in-between, aka healthy, that sits between bubble and falling.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- frgtpsswrdlame 9y agoIt's because of how much money and emotion the average person is throwing into a house.
- dfhdfhfdh 9y agoMaybe housing shouldn't be a market system. Instead, housing should be free and landlords should be abolished.
- baursak 9y agoOh I'm up for that my dude. Basic Maslow pyramid necessities should indeed be free and freely available. Food, water and shelter are top of that list.
- lolsal 9y agoYour mindset completely boggles my mind.
- zanny 9y agoAlternate economic views are incomprehensible?
- lolsal 9y agoNo, not at all. Other economic views are definitely comprehensible to me, however this particular one is mind boggling because me and OP seem to have genuinely incompatible principals and values. "housing should be free" - according to who? What entity is coercing the 'should' in that sentence? What law of nature says that housing should be free? It implies in a society that you have a right to someone else's time and labor. That's amazing! It makes me wonder why the OP thinks that way and what circumstances led them to think that way.
- zanny 9y agoI mean, in every modern country you have the right to someone elses time and labor. Most places have socialized medicine, literal usage of someones elses time for free and compensated by society as a whole, you use roads you didn't directly pay for, etc. In a lot of places you can (or used to) get free water. Literally other peoples work for free. Almost all the structural parts of modern society are built on providing people with services for free that come from the tax pool. You can even, depending on country, get free housing through poverty programs! But in general, modern states exist in part to forcibly take from some to give to others by the whims of the majority. They all do it. "Public" housing is just another proposition in that spectrum of policies. But specifically: > according to who? Currently them, but if it were according to most in most democracies that would mean it would eventually become law. > What entity is coercing the 'should' in that sentence? States, as with all other legal uses of force. > What law of nature says that housing should be free? No law of nature says property rights exist (especially intellectual property), but we make those up to establish civilization. You can definitely be ideologically opposed to those ideas! But their existence shouldn't be a surprise, humans have been establishing radically different rules of society for millennia from one another, and seeing someone on the Internet propose something you find far out should be expected!
- tdb7893 9y agoWould housing choices essentially just be a lottery for who gets which house then?
- s_kilk 9y agoThe word you're looking for is Decommodification.
- ppeetteerr 9y agoThe first part makes sense, the second is just communist non-sense. Location is still important and better location will be desirable, regardless of the value system you use to value desirability.
- literallycancer 9y agoHow do you propose we decide who gets the best house? And who's going to pay for it?
- rsynnott 9y agoYeah; rapid change in either direction in house prices tends to cause severe problems, ie a crisis.
- draw_down 9y agoYes, you don't get it.