28 ms·

How do you figure? If more houses are built, prices will go down.

jfghi 3y ago
I disagree with this notion. Rental values are often controlled algorithmically. Given the low inventory of housing for sale, it’s possible for the monopolists to purchase the new homes and use vacancy in order to maintain higher levels of pricing for the portfolio by artificially controlling the supply levels.
- galangalalgol 3y ago
  If property taxes were evaluated the same way for the landlords as for everyone else, that wouldn't be feasible would it? And home maintenance and insurance for unoccupied homes is typically very high. There is also the risk of squatting or the cost of people to prevent that. Has anyone done some math on the housing density that is most economical? My guess would be that the height limit would be close to five or six stories before the engineering to go higher was excessive, but that is just a wild guess. Courtyards down to ground level so people can have an external view seem wasteful from a heating and cooling perspective, most people don't want to live with no windows.
- omnimus 3y ago
  Yeah this fairy tale that we dont build enough because of regulation is told everywhere. Even in countries with rapidly declining population and long reign of right wing anti regulation governments. The real solution would be to fight the speculation and accept acces to a home as a human right. So prohibit/tax unrented rentals, progressively taxes owning multiple homes. I live in a poorer EU country where foreign money bought everything they could. They dont even bother renting it out because increase of the value of the properties is where the money is. If they started to rent the evaulations would fall.
- BurningFrog 3y ago
  The plural of "the monopolists" is an interesting concept :)
  - jowea 3y ago
    I think the word is "cartel".
    - BurningFrog 3y ago
      "Oligopoly" if you're an economist.
bradjohnson 3y ago
This is clearly not true if you observe actual real estate and rental prices and as long as we continue to allow corporations to own a majority of development projects, it should be obvious this won't work. The profit incentive doesn't work this way, and they are better off just letting a home sit empty than to dilute the value of their portfolio by selling or renting low to compete against themselves.
Podgajski 3y ago
There is not perfect price elasticity in the housing market. The demand for housing right now is pretty much infinite because of the speculation. In other words, the housing price is not based on supply, but it’s based on the demand. And the demand is being driven by speculators. The answer is to remove housing as an investment vehicle. Also prohibiting the ownership of multiple houses by a single individual or institution.

I disagree with this notion. Rental values are often controlled algorithmically. Given the low inventory of housing for sale, it’s possible for the monopolists to purchase the new homes and use vacancy in order to maintain higher levels of pricing for the portfolio by artificially controlling the supply levels.

galangalalgol 3y ago
If property taxes were evaluated the same way for the landlords as for everyone else, that wouldn't be feasible would it? And home maintenance and insurance for unoccupied homes is typically very high. There is also the risk of squatting or the cost of people to prevent that. Has anyone done some math on the housing density that is most economical? My guess would be that the height limit would be close to five or six stories before the engineering to go higher was excessive, but that is just a wild guess. Courtyards down to ground level so people can have an external view seem wasteful from a heating and cooling perspective, most people don't want to live with no windows.
omnimus 3y ago
Yeah this fairy tale that we dont build enough because of regulation is told everywhere. Even in countries with rapidly declining population and long reign of right wing anti regulation governments. The real solution would be to fight the speculation and accept acces to a home as a human right. So prohibit/tax unrented rentals, progressively taxes owning multiple homes. I live in a poorer EU country where foreign money bought everything they could. They dont even bother renting it out because increase of the value of the properties is where the money is. If they started to rent the evaulations would fall.
BurningFrog 3y ago
The plural of "the monopolists" is an interesting concept :)
- jowea 3y ago
  I think the word is "cartel".
  - BurningFrog 3y ago
    "Oligopoly" if you're an economist.

bradjohnson 3y ago

This is clearly not true if you observe actual real estate and rental prices and as long as we continue to allow corporations to own a majority of development projects, it should be obvious this won't work. The profit incentive doesn't work this way, and they are better off just letting a home sit empty than to dilute the value of their portfolio by selling or renting low to compete against themselves.

Podgajski 3y ago

There is not perfect price elasticity in the housing market. The demand for housing right now is pretty much infinite because of the speculation. In other words, the housing price is not based on supply, but it’s based on the demand. And the demand is being driven by speculators. The answer is to remove housing as an investment vehicle. Also prohibiting the ownership of multiple houses by a single individual or institution.