3 ms·

Long-term renting is just not recognized as legitimate housing in America. We are all temporarily embarrassed homeowners.

• prepend 3y ago
  It is recognized. But I think the goal is that 90% of people should be homeowners and getting people there. For the vast majority of people, owning a home is superior to renting. So I think most home policy is in getting people able to purchase, own, and sustain their own home. Certainly, some people’s situation makes rent better, but it’s much smaller than people who should buy. But it’s too expensive to buy for too many people. I don’t think someone should be embarrassed, but it’s not like the goal here is to get more people renting and fewer owning.
  • mistrial9 3y ago
    > the goal is that 90% of people should be homeowners yeah right - info welcome from those that read giant books on the 2008 credit events.. one thread in that is that it was a clumsy and heavy-handed, politics-origin set of decisions to make "sub-prime" mortgage rates available widely, in order to move the homeownership rates in the general population from sixty-something percent to the glory-lands of ninety-something percent. Well, in fact lending policy at scale did not do that, and as a side-effect the entire US and possible dollar-based credit system cracked at the base. The strongest economy in the world, actually almost did choke on credit. Meanwhile, a recent study echoed here on YNews said that "A million homes are being kept empty while housing costs soar" WSJ . How does one reconcile this?
    • prepend 3y ago
      Sell the million homes to people who need homes? Seems like a simple option.