4 ms·

What if I leave for work for a year? Or 4? What is a "good" reason? If I own a house and left for a decade to binge drink, why should that mean I don't keep my

What if I leave for work for a year? Or 4? What is a "good" reason? If I own a house and left for a decade to binge drink, why should that mean I don't keep my paid for property? At what threshold do you tell someone: fuck you and your property, we are taking it because we want it. If siblings inherit, should only the ones who live there have any rights to it?

ajross 3y ago
That's right, there are tradeoffs. So an absolute answer isn't the right solution here and we need to come up with policies that meet everyone's needs. To pick your first example: keeping your old home while you work abroad for a year seems not unreasonable. But demanding that you place it on the market as a rental (or sell it) if you're gone for 4-10 (!) seems likewise like a very reasonable regulation to me.
- user432678 3y ago
  Where should I put my stuff, while the property is being rented? What if I get fired and need to return in a short notice (working on a worker’s visa)? My situation is exactly that, I left my apartment first time for 3 years. Got fired and had to return. This time it’s six years already, haven’t been “home” even once since then. I don’t have anyone to help me manage the rental. Not selling the apartment right now because I’m waiting for citizenship in a different country. Which might not work out, thus I’ll need a place to return to. Yes, my situation is anecdotal, can’t disagree. But forcing me to rent out with more taxes doesn’t sound fair as well. Especially that in many places it’s the government who created all that bureaucracy which prevents people to build new houses inflating prices and all that.
crmd 3y ago
Rent it out to strangers, let friends live there for free if you want. Do anything other than letting a home sit vacant when there are tons of unhoused people sleeping in the street.
- mozman 3y ago
  renters are a liability.
  - ajross 3y ago
    So are taxes and trees, but you have to pay them and hold insurance anyway. The point is that society as a whole has interest in the community in which that home exists, and it regulates the behavior of homeowners for the benefit of everyone. "Your home has to have people in it" is, 100%, a valid policy goal. And in extremis, paradigms like adverse possession exist to ensure this.
    - sethammons 3y ago
      I'm sorry, how do taxes or trees destroy the value of a property? Tenants absolutely can ruin a house. Imagine the surprise when you find out the tenants have done more damage to a property than their rent covers. Yes, people need and should be housed. No, that doesn't mean they need _my_ house. Build up public housing resources. If the govt wants to buy my property at market rate and give it away, and I agree to sell, go for it. Otherwise, I hear you have a good retirement fund that you spent years building. I didn't didn't do that, so just give me half of what you saved and we will call it fair.
      - nmfisher 3y ago
        The reasonable compromise is to heavily tax vacant properties and spend the revenue building public housing.
        mozman 3y ago
        We need to improve our mental health care system and get these people working, so they can rent. There isnt a shortage of homes, just a shortage of money to pay rent.
        3y ago
throwaway290 3y ago
> What if I leave for work for a year? Or 4? What is a "good" reason? Where do you live during that time? > why should that mean I don't keep my paid for property? Because someone may want to live somewhere but land is too expensive because everyone is hoarding it? > At what threshold do you tell someone: fuck you and your property, we are taking it because we want it. "residential housing not being used as a residence for more than N years"?
- sethammons 3y ago
  >> What if I leave for work for a year? Or 4? What is a "good" reason? > Where do you live during that time? Antarctic Research Station followed by a backpacking trip through Europe. >> why should that mean I don't keep my paid for property? > Because someone may want to live somewhere but land is too expensive because everyone is hoarding it? Food gets expensive; let the hungry take, literally, from your kitchen? Not everyone can live in downtown, some must go to the sticks. West Virginia has some land at $1000 an acre. What is the right density in the city? How small should homes be? How many to a room? >> At what threshold do you tell someone: fuck you and your property, we are taking it because we want it. > "residential housing not being used as a residence for more than N years"? Prove I didn't stop by for a few days N-1 years ago. -- Affordable housing is a real need, and local governments and city planners should work to make that so. You don't get to take my family's nth-generation home because my area is popular and we don't use it in a way you approve.
  - throwaway290 3y ago
    So essentially you have no use for land/housing for extended period of time but you want to keep it. That's the textbook definition of hoarding real estate. And please don't give this BS about generations. Just ask yourself: would you sell your grandgrandpa's home if you knew tomorrow its price was not up but got halved, day after day? There's the answer about your true motivations. > Prove I didn't stop by for a few days N-1 years ago. Stopping by != using as residence. I stop by local Mcd occasionally, don't mean I live there. I'm vehemently not a communist but this sort of entitlement is cancer on humanity. Land is zero sum and a commons. These things are never not regulated in a healthy society. Even in US owning estate never means you are free to do anything you want with it, even if you live in it. Not hoarding it is only another one of those rules, sadly not supported by law enough.

ajross 3y ago

That's right, there are tradeoffs. So an absolute answer isn't the right solution here and we need to come up with policies that meet everyone's needs. To pick your first example: keeping your old home while you work abroad for a year seems not unreasonable. But demanding that you place it on the market as a rental (or sell it) if you're gone for 4-10 (!) seems likewise like a very reasonable regulation to me.

user432678 3y ago
Where should I put my stuff, while the property is being rented? What if I get fired and need to return in a short notice (working on a worker’s visa)? My situation is exactly that, I left my apartment first time for 3 years. Got fired and had to return. This time it’s six years already, haven’t been “home” even once since then. I don’t have anyone to help me manage the rental. Not selling the apartment right now because I’m waiting for citizenship in a different country. Which might not work out, thus I’ll need a place to return to. Yes, my situation is anecdotal, can’t disagree. But forcing me to rent out with more taxes doesn’t sound fair as well. Especially that in many places it’s the government who created all that bureaucracy which prevents people to build new houses inflating prices and all that.

crmd 3y ago

Rent it out to strangers, let friends live there for free if you want. Do anything other than letting a home sit vacant when there are tons of unhoused people sleeping in the street.

mozman 3y ago
renters are a liability.
- ajross 3y ago
  So are taxes and trees, but you have to pay them and hold insurance anyway. The point is that society as a whole has interest in the community in which that home exists, and it regulates the behavior of homeowners for the benefit of everyone. "Your home has to have people in it" is, 100%, a valid policy goal. And in extremis, paradigms like adverse possession exist to ensure this.
  - sethammons 3y ago
    I'm sorry, how do taxes or trees destroy the value of a property? Tenants absolutely can ruin a house. Imagine the surprise when you find out the tenants have done more damage to a property than their rent covers. Yes, people need and should be housed. No, that doesn't mean they need _my_ house. Build up public housing resources. If the govt wants to buy my property at market rate and give it away, and I agree to sell, go for it. Otherwise, I hear you have a good retirement fund that you spent years building. I didn't didn't do that, so just give me half of what you saved and we will call it fair.
    - nmfisher 3y ago
      The reasonable compromise is to heavily tax vacant properties and spend the revenue building public housing.
      - mozman 3y ago
        We need to improve our mental health care system and get these people working, so they can rent. There isnt a shortage of homes, just a shortage of money to pay rent.
        3y ago

throwaway290 3y ago

> What if I leave for work for a year? Or 4? What is a "good" reason? Where do you live during that time? > why should that mean I don't keep my paid for property? Because someone may want to live somewhere but land is too expensive because everyone is hoarding it? > At what threshold do you tell someone: fuck you and your property, we are taking it because we want it. "residential housing not being used as a residence for more than N years"?

sethammons 3y ago
>> What if I leave for work for a year? Or 4? What is a "good" reason? > Where do you live during that time? Antarctic Research Station followed by a backpacking trip through Europe. >> why should that mean I don't keep my paid for property? > Because someone may want to live somewhere but land is too expensive because everyone is hoarding it? Food gets expensive; let the hungry take, literally, from your kitchen? Not everyone can live in downtown, some must go to the sticks. West Virginia has some land at $1000 an acre. What is the right density in the city? How small should homes be? How many to a room? >> At what threshold do you tell someone: fuck you and your property, we are taking it because we want it. > "residential housing not being used as a residence for more than N years"? Prove I didn't stop by for a few days N-1 years ago. -- Affordable housing is a real need, and local governments and city planners should work to make that so. You don't get to take my family's nth-generation home because my area is popular and we don't use it in a way you approve.
- throwaway290 3y ago
  So essentially you have no use for land/housing for extended period of time but you want to keep it. That's the textbook definition of hoarding real estate. And please don't give this BS about generations. Just ask yourself: would you sell your grandgrandpa's home if you knew tomorrow its price was not up but got halved, day after day? There's the answer about your true motivations. > Prove I didn't stop by for a few days N-1 years ago. Stopping by != using as residence. I stop by local Mcd occasionally, don't mean I live there. I'm vehemently not a communist but this sort of entitlement is cancer on humanity. Land is zero sum and a commons. These things are never not regulated in a healthy society. Even in US owning estate never means you are free to do anything you want with it, even if you live in it. Not hoarding it is only another one of those rules, sadly not supported by law enough.