4 ms·

"You create an insane level amount of supply for homeownership on this market. An absolutely insane level." You're completely ignoring the fact that homeowners

"You create an insane level amount of supply for homeownership on this market. An absolutely insane level." You're completely ignoring the fact that homeownership, even if prices aren't incredibly high, requires a large down payment that many people don't have, which is why they rent. Those people still can't afford to buy and are pushed out, and they're the ones you're supposed to be helping. "If somehow millions of people do buy houses in Berlin, then you build public housing to undercut the price of housing." This is where your argument totally loses steam. You can't just handwave and say you'll build public housing... that is an incredibly expensive and politically difficult thing to do. When your theoretical solution to the problem is something that is very much not guaranteed (or even likely), and you pretend it'll just be no problem at all, you're ignoring reality and not presenting a useful solution.

sudosysgen 6y ago
Public housing is neither incredibly expensive nor politically difficult as long as you have a competent government and laws that don't artificially make it more expensive (see: US). The economics are very simple. The price of housing if it's not profitable to rent and even less profitable to hold will drop until occupancy is high. Those that can't put down a down payment will rent, the others will buy. If not, the price will just continue to go down. This argument isn't theoretical. It's an actual process that has been done and works.
- brutusborn 6y ago
  Where abouts does it work currently and do you have any data to support this? I'm genuinely curious. Also don't forget about renters keeping tennancies vacant temporarily, to avoid losing their locked in rent control rate. I have heard many stories of affluent people keeping a "cheap" apartment in New York vacant for years on end.
tormeh 6y ago
> This is where your argument totally loses steam. You can't just handwave and say you'll build public housing... that is an incredibly expensive and politically difficult thing to do. When your theoretical solution to the problem is something that is very much not guaranteed (or even likely), and you pretend it'll just be no problem at all, you're ignoring reality and not presenting a useful solution. Just issue municipal bonds, and use that money to build. Investors pay the German government to hold their money. Building is not expensive at all.

sudosysgen 6y ago

Public housing is neither incredibly expensive nor politically difficult as long as you have a competent government and laws that don't artificially make it more expensive (see: US). The economics are very simple. The price of housing if it's not profitable to rent and even less profitable to hold will drop until occupancy is high. Those that can't put down a down payment will rent, the others will buy. If not, the price will just continue to go down. This argument isn't theoretical. It's an actual process that has been done and works.

brutusborn 6y ago
Where abouts does it work currently and do you have any data to support this? I'm genuinely curious. Also don't forget about renters keeping tennancies vacant temporarily, to avoid losing their locked in rent control rate. I have heard many stories of affluent people keeping a "cheap" apartment in New York vacant for years on end.

tormeh 6y ago

> This is where your argument totally loses steam. You can't just handwave and say you'll build public housing... that is an incredibly expensive and politically difficult thing to do. When your theoretical solution to the problem is something that is very much not guaranteed (or even likely), and you pretend it'll just be no problem at all, you're ignoring reality and not presenting a useful solution. Just issue municipal bonds, and use that money to build. Investors pay the German government to hold their money. Building is not expensive at all.