4 ms·
It seems like there is an emerging western world trend of people being unable to afford their home, landlords being unable to enforce their property rights, and
by bgorman 5y ago
It seems like there is an emerging western world trend of people being unable to afford their home, landlords being unable to enforce their property rights, and housing activists opposing new construction and rent increases.
Generally all these issues seem to be made worse by restrictions on new housing development, land use restrictions and a large indigent population who cannot afford housing with their current wage earning ability.
For now it seems like the government’s preferred solution is to not address the root causes and let landlords slowly incur losses and wealthier renters pay through the nose. I believe governments should be doing the exact opposite, they should have landlord and development friendly laws. The alternative seems to be mass homelessness and general societal decay. No one will invest in real estate if property rights cannot be enforced. However, indigent voters are a large vote bank. In California, 60% of adults paid no income tax in 2020.
- nivenkos 5y agoReal estate shouldn't be an investment. Just let people own the homes they live in. Everything else should be well-regulated perhaps even by government monopoly (e.g. first hand contracts in Sweden, or council houses in the UK). The entire reason we have such issues is because housing has become such a popular investment.
- AlexandrB 5y ago> No one will invest in real estate if property rights cannot be enforced. Good! "Real-estate as investment" is one factor responsible for the above-inflation rise of property values. It's part of why housing is unaffordable in so many areas. Non primary residences should be taxed out the nose.
- fighterpilot 5y agoNonsense. You reduce house prices by increasing supply via construction of apartments, and potentially having a land value tax. You don't do it by undermining property rights. This just makes everyone's reality a living hell and doesn't solve anything. What a truly sinister worldview you've adopted.
- anigbrowl 5y agoWhile I find your proposal agreeable I feel bound to point out that it's not really happening, and meanwhile abusive/exploitative property investment practices are going on day by day. I think in many jurisdictions too much importance is attached to property rights and that is exploited by wealthy individuals and corporate actors to the great detriment of their neighbors and the health of the economy.
- fighterpilot 5y agoDisagree that too much importance is placed on property rights. It's one of the necessary conditions for societal prosperity. History is very clear on that. Disagree that the wealthy are "exploiting" property rights. The wealthy are exploiting government to push through NIMBY policies that cap supply, similar to how the poor are exploiting government to turn the other cheek and decriminalize squatting. If you subtly erode property rights by decriminalizing theft you get a hellscape and decay. You haven't helped the poor, you've helped the worst and most shameless moral characters in our society. My former colleague was a victim of squatting. He owned one apartment and rented to live and some asshole who is apparently a serial squatter moved into his apartment and refused to pay. I will never support the psychopaths doing it and I will never support the ideologues enabling these vampires.
- anigbrowl 5y agoWell, I don't have time to argue with such absolutism.
- fighterpilot 5y agoI'm an absolutist about property rights similar to the way you might be an absolutist about slavery or murder. It doesn't make me wrong.
- arodgers_la 5y agoDo you have a source for that number? It sounds wrong. Most people have income tax withheld on their paychecks. That is paying income tax.