3 ms·
Empirically: - Limit ownership to residents. - Limit the amount of houses per person. Max. of 2? - Limit airbnb outside touristic areas. Stuff that doesn't
by galfarragem 4y ago
Empirically:
- Limit ownership to residents.
- Limit the amount of houses per person. Max. of 2?
- Limit airbnb outside touristic areas.
Stuff that doesn't work: subsidize houses or limit rents.
- endisneigh 4y agoAfter you do all of that what happens if people still want to buy? Migrants come in, people are born? Homelessness I guess? Why have a max of two? Seems arbitrary, why not one?
- galfarragem 4y ago> Why have a max of two? Seems arbitrary, why not one? Finding the sweet spot implies trial end error. It's certainly not 1 and I suspect 2 is too restrictive unnecessarily. The relevant is to restrain housing from being a financial instrument not to repress people. If a person can't buy a dozen houses the demand (and consequently the price) will fall.
- endisneigh 4y ago1. You can’t be in two places simultaneously - there’s no reason to own more than one house per person. 2. If no one can own multiple houses, then rentals cannot exist. Where do those who cannot afford to buy live?
- orwin 4y ago> After you do all of that what happens if people still want to buy? Migrants come in, people are born? Homelessness I guess? Easy, local government pay for new developpements according to their needs, and rent them at 1/20th of their cost (per year, a bit more to account for losses maybe) for at least 10 year, after which the familly/homeowner can buy the rest of the house.
- endisneigh 4y agoWhere does the government get the money to do this?