3 ms·

I think this is blatantly unethical, but also stupid. By creating a speculative bubble fueled by low interest and moderate to high inflation, these people will

I think this is blatantly unethical, but also stupid. By creating a speculative bubble fueled by low interest and moderate to high inflation, these people will put themselves upside down in their holdings. Meanwhile this drives up homelessness (plenty of tent cities popped up near me as rents and housing prices skyrocketed) which will drive political instability and increase crime as people become desperate. Edit: one more thought, this also really hurts people who priced carefully by increasing their property tax and insurance rates by no fault of their own.

NonNefarious 4y ago
I agree about the housing speculation, but I challenge the (oft-repeated) assertion that this has caused homelessness. If you could afford to pay SOME rent in an area that got more expensive, then you can move to a less-expensive area and pay the same rent.
- hackerlight 4y ago
  Assuming no economic frictions whatsoever, which in reality is not the case, especially when it comes to someone moving their entire life away from their social network and their familiar surroundings.
  - NonNefarious 4y ago
    So your thesis is that people decide to become homeless to retain their social network?
    - hackerlight 4y ago
      My thesis is that economic frictions cause cases of homelessness that were theoretically avoidable. Their current social network isn't the only friction. Low IQ, mental health issues, no familiarity with COL or opportunities or people in other locations. These are other frictions. All the stuff that gets in the way of people making an optimal decision.
- IX-103 4y ago
  Who's paying for the move? How does the move affect commutes and how close is the new dwelling to essential services? If you were already in the lowest priced area and that became too expensive, where do you go?
  - NonNefarious 4y ago
    How many people are ejected from "the lowest-priced area?" I guess we can exempt all of them, then. But nowhere in L.A. County (for example) is the lowest-priced area. And regardless of where the next one might be, are we really to believe that living on the street is a better choice?

NonNefarious 4y ago

I agree about the housing speculation, but I challenge the (oft-repeated) assertion that this has caused homelessness. If you could afford to pay SOME rent in an area that got more expensive, then you can move to a less-expensive area and pay the same rent.

hackerlight 4y ago
Assuming no economic frictions whatsoever, which in reality is not the case, especially when it comes to someone moving their entire life away from their social network and their familiar surroundings.
- NonNefarious 4y ago
  So your thesis is that people decide to become homeless to retain their social network?
  - hackerlight 4y ago
    My thesis is that economic frictions cause cases of homelessness that were theoretically avoidable. Their current social network isn't the only friction. Low IQ, mental health issues, no familiarity with COL or opportunities or people in other locations. These are other frictions. All the stuff that gets in the way of people making an optimal decision.
IX-103 4y ago
Who's paying for the move? How does the move affect commutes and how close is the new dwelling to essential services? If you were already in the lowest priced area and that became too expensive, where do you go?
- NonNefarious 4y ago
  How many people are ejected from "the lowest-priced area?" I guess we can exempt all of them, then. But nowhere in L.A. County (for example) is the lowest-priced area. And regardless of where the next one might be, are we really to believe that living on the street is a better choice?