3 ms·

With the escalating wealth inequality and an inability for young people to afford homes is that now what IS happening?

mnouquet 5y ago
There is plenty of affordable homes, especially with the rise of remote work. Moreover, because some people choose not to own doesn't mean it shall be imposed by force to a whole population.
- jlokier 5y ago
  There's currently a vast number of people renting who are not "choosing" not to own. Many of them want to own, but lament that no matter how hard they work, prices are out of reach and rising faster than they can ever hope to save. Some pray for a price crash, after they saved for a mortgage deposit but prices went up so it's not enough any more. Meanwhile rent is a substantial part of their income, and often costs more than a mortgage for the same property would, so they would choose a mortgage if they could, but can't get one. Many of them live in poor quality conditions too, unable to improve or repair the property they are in, and at constant threat of eviction on the landlord's whim, and face difficulties finding a similar place to rent when it happens. For most of them, the work they are skilled in either cannot be done remotely, or is low paid work (eg remote call centre worker). There is also the not entirely trivial problem that moving to a completely different location with low prices and higher supply typically means low wages and fewer jobs, along with losing all your friends and family network, which is crucial if you are already struggling, and doubly so if you have a young family. This increasingly affects more older people approaching retirement age, who worry about how they are supposed to pay rent when they are too old to work. The pension won't cover it. They are not choosing to not own.
  - mnouquet 5y ago
    I don't see how feudalism would help there, beside ensuring the people you are talking about are killing themselves in the fields. I also don't see how more and more regulations ensure this won't happen, as it most likely had the exact opposite effect: prevent new wealth from establishing itself (high regulation preventing blooming wealth from building enough momentum to escape taxes) and enshrines "old" money. Regulations gives a clear advantage to people already established.
    - jlokier 5y ago
      I'm arguing against "there are plenty of affordable homes" in a useful sense, and the implication that most people who don't own have chosen not to own. I'm not arguing that feudalism is part of the solution.

There is plenty of affordable homes, especially with the rise of remote work. Moreover, because some people choose not to own doesn't mean it shall be imposed by force to a whole population.

jlokier 5y ago
There's currently a vast number of people renting who are not "choosing" not to own. Many of them want to own, but lament that no matter how hard they work, prices are out of reach and rising faster than they can ever hope to save. Some pray for a price crash, after they saved for a mortgage deposit but prices went up so it's not enough any more. Meanwhile rent is a substantial part of their income, and often costs more than a mortgage for the same property would, so they would choose a mortgage if they could, but can't get one. Many of them live in poor quality conditions too, unable to improve or repair the property they are in, and at constant threat of eviction on the landlord's whim, and face difficulties finding a similar place to rent when it happens. For most of them, the work they are skilled in either cannot be done remotely, or is low paid work (eg remote call centre worker). There is also the not entirely trivial problem that moving to a completely different location with low prices and higher supply typically means low wages and fewer jobs, along with losing all your friends and family network, which is crucial if you are already struggling, and doubly so if you have a young family. This increasingly affects more older people approaching retirement age, who worry about how they are supposed to pay rent when they are too old to work. The pension won't cover it. They are not choosing to not own.
- mnouquet 5y ago
  I don't see how feudalism would help there, beside ensuring the people you are talking about are killing themselves in the fields. I also don't see how more and more regulations ensure this won't happen, as it most likely had the exact opposite effect: prevent new wealth from establishing itself (high regulation preventing blooming wealth from building enough momentum to escape taxes) and enshrines "old" money. Regulations gives a clear advantage to people already established.
  - jlokier 5y ago
    I'm arguing against "there are plenty of affordable homes" in a useful sense, and the implication that most people who don't own have chosen not to own. I'm not arguing that feudalism is part of the solution.