3 ms·

> I don’t think the intention is to reduce rentals, just to stop prices from going up. The legislation described in TFA is quite literally designed to cut off

> I don’t think the intention is to reduce rentals, just to stop prices from going up. The legislation described in TFA is quite literally designed to cut off the introduction of newly built houses in the rental market, including investments in real estate focused on that market segment.

mcv 8y ago
TFA disagrees with you: "Amsterdam’s proposed laws wouldn’t stop new rental housing from being built—according to the city’s proposal, that housing would simply have to be proposed and approved as rental property in the first place."
- lukevdp 8y ago
  And what is the approval process? Where I live, to cut down a tree, you can get it approved by council. The problem is, they do not approve any applications.
- geezerjay 8y ago
  > TFA disagrees with you: Quite the opposite in fact. TFA is quite clear on how their aim is to stop new housing units to be used for rentals, and they even force an arbitrary process to approve exceptions to the ban by enabling local polititians to approve specific projects they may see as acceptable. Nevertheless, the goal is quite clear: raise barriers to the introduction of rental properties.
  - ricardobeat 8y ago
    The rule is for koopwoningen only - houses built for sale (owner-occupied). The market here is quite regulated and new builds have to provide a mix of owned, rented and social housing units. The limitation will just prevent the owned units from shifting to rentals as an investment.
  - mcv 8y ago
    No, you are misreading or misrepresenting what the article says. The measure is meant to stop houses that are meant for people to purchase and live in to be bought by investors to rent them out. The reason for that is that those investors are reducing the supply houses available for purchase, and driving the prices up. Rental homes are still available for rent. Nothing changes there. The city invests a lot in affordable rental houses. That's not going to change. They just want to stop investors and speculators from snatching up the available houses.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

mcv 8y ago

TFA disagrees with you: "Amsterdam’s proposed laws wouldn’t stop new rental housing from being built—according to the city’s proposal, that housing would simply have to be proposed and approved as rental property in the first place."

lukevdp 8y ago
And what is the approval process? Where I live, to cut down a tree, you can get it approved by council. The problem is, they do not approve any applications.
geezerjay 8y ago
> TFA disagrees with you: Quite the opposite in fact. TFA is quite clear on how their aim is to stop new housing units to be used for rentals, and they even force an arbitrary process to approve exceptions to the ban by enabling local polititians to approve specific projects they may see as acceptable. Nevertheless, the goal is quite clear: raise barriers to the introduction of rental properties.
- ricardobeat 8y ago
  The rule is for koopwoningen only - houses built for sale (owner-occupied). The market here is quite regulated and new builds have to provide a mix of owned, rented and social housing units. The limitation will just prevent the owned units from shifting to rentals as an investment.
- mcv 8y ago
  No, you are misreading or misrepresenting what the article says. The measure is meant to stop houses that are meant for people to purchase and live in to be bought by investors to rent them out. The reason for that is that those investors are reducing the supply houses available for purchase, and driving the prices up. Rental homes are still available for rent. Nothing changes there. The city invests a lot in affordable rental houses. That's not going to change. They just want to stop investors and speculators from snatching up the available houses.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]