3 ms·

Please stop. Zoning issues/lack of supply would imply that there are lots of homeless people without a roof over their head. Investors have too much access to

Please stop. Zoning issues/lack of supply would imply that there are lots of homeless people without a roof over their head. Investors have too much access to property. It's a system of greed that benefits those who entered the market early (typically boomers). Just stop blaming zoning already.

arcticbull 5y ago
Sorry but it's zoning's fault haha. > Zoning issues/lack of supply would imply that there are lots of homeless people without a roof over their head. The price of housing only matters to people who don't already have homes they own. 65% of Americans own homes, so that cuts down your working set dramatically. There are a lot of homeless people, yes - 0.2% of the population - but lack of affordable housing tends to be roughly equivalent to "perma-renting" as renting has a lower barrier to entry. To buy a home you have to come up with a lump sum of money to make a down payment. If you can't do that, you're forced to rent or split accommodation or live with your parents. Lack of affordable housing doesn't mean homelessness. There's a lot of elasticity there. > Investors have too much access to property. It's a system of greed that benefits those who entered the market early (typically boomers). Investors buy property to rent because home ownership is unaffordable. Blackrock buying up property is a symptom of the market, not a cause. They don't see houses becoming cheaper because they don't see zoning reform on the horizon, so they believe there will be long-standing demand for their rental units. If housing were to become affordable, due to a large increase in supply, these investors would get bowled over twice - once due to lower real property value and once more due to lack of demand for rental units as folks buy instead. Even foreigners parking capital abroad, more supply makes that (a) a bad idea and (b) kind of irrelevant. I'm not saying that shouldn't be tackled too, but once again, zoning would solve the problem.
- tedk-42 5y ago
  the conflict you ond i have is you believe investors are benevolent and are helping poor folk who can't buy. i don't believe anything of what youre arguing simply because more supply will continue to be purchased by investors to further drive up prices.
  - arcticbull 5y ago
    Ah, I may just be doing a bad job of explaining myself. I certainly don't believe investors are benevolent :) > i don't believe anything of what youre arguing simply because more supply will continue to be purchased by investors to further drive up prices. I think Japan shows us there are limits to this. Anyways, I appreciate your thoughts!
jjk166 5y ago
There are lots of homeless people. There's an even larger population of people who are, for example, living in their parents basements, or over-occupying small apartments, or commuting for hours because they are living in distant, cheaper areas.

arcticbull 5y ago

Sorry but it's zoning's fault haha. > Zoning issues/lack of supply would imply that there are lots of homeless people without a roof over their head. The price of housing only matters to people who don't already have homes they own. 65% of Americans own homes, so that cuts down your working set dramatically. There are a lot of homeless people, yes - 0.2% of the population - but lack of affordable housing tends to be roughly equivalent to "perma-renting" as renting has a lower barrier to entry. To buy a home you have to come up with a lump sum of money to make a down payment. If you can't do that, you're forced to rent or split accommodation or live with your parents. Lack of affordable housing doesn't mean homelessness. There's a lot of elasticity there. > Investors have too much access to property. It's a system of greed that benefits those who entered the market early (typically boomers). Investors buy property to rent because home ownership is unaffordable. Blackrock buying up property is a symptom of the market, not a cause. They don't see houses becoming cheaper because they don't see zoning reform on the horizon, so they believe there will be long-standing demand for their rental units. If housing were to become affordable, due to a large increase in supply, these investors would get bowled over twice - once due to lower real property value and once more due to lack of demand for rental units as folks buy instead. Even foreigners parking capital abroad, more supply makes that (a) a bad idea and (b) kind of irrelevant. I'm not saying that shouldn't be tackled too, but once again, zoning would solve the problem.

tedk-42 5y ago
the conflict you ond i have is you believe investors are benevolent and are helping poor folk who can't buy. i don't believe anything of what youre arguing simply because more supply will continue to be purchased by investors to further drive up prices.
- arcticbull 5y ago
  Ah, I may just be doing a bad job of explaining myself. I certainly don't believe investors are benevolent :) > i don't believe anything of what youre arguing simply because more supply will continue to be purchased by investors to further drive up prices. I think Japan shows us there are limits to this. Anyways, I appreciate your thoughts!

jjk166 5y ago

There are lots of homeless people. There's an even larger population of people who are, for example, living in their parents basements, or over-occupying small apartments, or commuting for hours because they are living in distant, cheaper areas.