3 ms·
Georgism is fundamentally flawed, and really has no benefits. This critique (https://orionsarm.com/fm_store/Critique%20of%20Georgism.htm https://orionsarm.com/f
by jdasdf 4y ago
Georgism is fundamentally flawed, and really has no benefits. This critique (https://orionsarm.com/fm_store/Critique%20of%20Georgism.htm https://orionsarm.com/fm_store/Critique%20of%20Georgism.htm) goes over some of the key problems with it.
The idea that "housing can be either affordable or an investment but not both" is also incorrect.
There is nothing wrong with having profitable housing investments, and that doesn't make it un-affordable, just the same as any other good or service does not become un-affordable just because it is profitable to provide.
As a general principle, something being profitable is a signal that said thing is necessary, and decreasing said profitability will only result in resources being diverted away from providing it. If you think housing is expensive now, you will be very unhappy with how expensive it will get once you make it unattractive to provide it.
The fact of the matter is that the high cost of housing has one primary cause, and it is not due to high profit margins. Indeed the high profit margins are a symptom of the cause.
The cause is a lack of strong property rights that enable property owners to do what they will with their property without anyone else, including the state, being able to tell them "No".
That's it.
It is very simple.
Everywhere you go in the world, you will see that in places where property owners have strong rights to do what they like with their properties, a competitive market forms and prices are subsequently reduced through that competition. You need only compare San Francisco to Tokyo to see this in action.
It is the urge of people like you, who wish to expropriate property owners of their property, either in full by taking their property away from them, or in part by imposing taxes on said property or restrictions on said property and its use, that cause high prices.
And it's inevitable that those high prices arise, after all those things are costs and property owners, investors and society in general will always bear those costs.
If you truly want affordable housing, then you need only do one thing... Nothing.
Tell property owners "We will not tax you, we will not restrict what you can do with your property in any way", and then act according to that.
Alternatively you can keep going on this well trodden path that for millennia has continued to cause the same problems it claims to want to stop.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- nwienert 4y agoI agree with some of what you said. Except: It’s hard to profit from a home in Tokyo outside of being a developer. That’s a good thing. But you’re implying you can have your cake (affordable housing) and eat it too (profitable housing). Not true. You can have largely affordable with only a few making profits, but not the majority. It’s less about lack of regulation on the individual level than for developers, which I think is important to distinguish. Both are good, but being able to build more / rebuild easily are more important than say regulations on types of pools.
- jdasdf 4y ago>It’s hard to profit from a home in Tokyo outside of being a developer. Why do you believe this? There is a functional rental market in Tokyo and I don't believe it is any less profitable than any other investment on a risk adjusted basis. The same applies to the home ownership market in Tokyo. If it were, the market would shrink until risk-adjusted return parity would be achieved.
- nwienert 4y agoLots of evidence. It’s easy to search for profitability of housing and it’s not high there. There’s a massive difference between near market or inflation-level returns and whatever’s been happening in the US.