4 ms·
They should be, shouldn't they? They're physical luxury goods that deteriorate as you use them, like cars. They appreciate largely because of nearby corporate
by neutronicus 6y ago
They should be, shouldn't they?
They're physical luxury goods that deteriorate as you use them, like cars. They appreciate largely because of nearby corporate and government investment (in office complices, schools, utilities).
That people make money off of them suggests that the government isn't being nearly aggressive enough about capturing the value it's creating here.
- claudeganon 6y agoYes, I agree entirely. Removing socially necessary goods like food, housing, and healthcare from financialized speculation would resolve many that issues countries like the US face.
- Spooky23 6y agoIt is really weird. My home is a wood-frame house >100 years old. Although some aspects are better than new construction, it seems weird that the underwriting is basically the same as a new property given the term of the loan I just refinanced. Even insurance is almost the same! I can travel a mile down the road and due to a "bad" neighborhood, many properties are literally negative value. They sit till they burn because demolition is more costly than the value of the land. Markets don't price risk well. Housing markets definitely don't price capital investments or liabilities more than 5 years out well.