16 ms·

The solution is strengthening the social housing sector. If anybody would be able to rent housing from the state, nobody would be dependent on private landlords

The solution is strengthening the social housing sector. If anybody would be able to rent housing from the state, nobody would be dependent on private landlords (though private landlords could still fill niches like short-time rentals). As it is though, the social housing sector is woefully underfunded, leading to sometimes decades-long waiting lists (at least where I live, in the Netherlands).

jorvi 3y ago
We also have the clown situation where you are deemed fit to rent for €1200 a month, but the banks won’t give you a €900 a month mortgage for the same sort of housing.
- bombcar 3y ago
  The USA often has the opposite problem; people who would be refused rentals at $900 are given loans at $1200, no problem. The key is which ones insulate the giver (landlord/lender) from non-payment (e.g., which are guaranteed by the government).
  - jorvi 3y ago
    The problem is that it really adds insult to injury. In the aforementioned situation, the home owner is both creating equity and saving 25% extra each month. It creates a very broken situation. But the Dutch government has coddled home owners for four to five decades already. And the real estate market is often zero sum, where advantaging one group disadvantages another. Time to make home owners bleed for a couple of decades. Balance must be restored.
username332211 3y ago
If we're talking about this sort of solutions, we must nevertheless implement a means to manage demand. After all, it's impossible to house the entire Netherlands in Amsterdam. In countries where housing was socialized they had a system of residency. You couldn't move to another city, without a permit. If you live in Tholen, you shouldn't be able to move to Amsterdam, unless you mary someone from there or if society determines there's a social need for more workers in the capital. After all, you can't socialize things while maintaining bourgeois concepts like "freedom of movement". You can't eat the cake and have it too, right?
- Tijdreiziger 3y ago
  You need to manage the supply, not the demand. As long as enough properties are built in the areas where people want to live, there’s no problem. Sure, maybe not everyone will be able to live smack in the center of Amsterdam, but there’s enough space in other parts of the city, not to mention nearby places like Amstelveen, Hoofddorp or Almere (which, you will know, house mostly ‘overflow’ from the Amsterdam market).
  - codedokode 3y ago
    If you want to create a fair system you should also build infrastructure otherwise it is unfair when someone lives near the subway in a historical part of the city and someone has to live near the forest among ugly modern high-rise buildings.
    - Jensson 3y ago
      That is how things are done all over Europe though. The state plans a new suburb by also planning bus stops, roads, subways, trains, parks, shopping malls and schools within walking distance etc. That ensures there are no really bad homes so even the cheap homes are in nice livable areas. It isn't expensive to build such areas, so there is no reason not to do it except if you want to punish the poor.
      - bombcar 3y ago
        Almost by definition the cheapest homes will be the “worst” homes so the goal is to make them as less bad as you can.

jorvi 3y ago

We also have the clown situation where you are deemed fit to rent for €1200 a month, but the banks won’t give you a €900 a month mortgage for the same sort of housing.

bombcar 3y ago
The USA often has the opposite problem; people who would be refused rentals at $900 are given loans at $1200, no problem. The key is which ones insulate the giver (landlord/lender) from non-payment (e.g., which are guaranteed by the government).
- jorvi 3y ago
  The problem is that it really adds insult to injury. In the aforementioned situation, the home owner is both creating equity and saving 25% extra each month. It creates a very broken situation. But the Dutch government has coddled home owners for four to five decades already. And the real estate market is often zero sum, where advantaging one group disadvantages another. Time to make home owners bleed for a couple of decades. Balance must be restored.

username332211 3y ago

If we're talking about this sort of solutions, we must nevertheless implement a means to manage demand. After all, it's impossible to house the entire Netherlands in Amsterdam. In countries where housing was socialized they had a system of residency. You couldn't move to another city, without a permit. If you live in Tholen, you shouldn't be able to move to Amsterdam, unless you mary someone from there or if society determines there's a social need for more workers in the capital. After all, you can't socialize things while maintaining bourgeois concepts like "freedom of movement". You can't eat the cake and have it too, right?

Tijdreiziger 3y ago
You need to manage the supply, not the demand. As long as enough properties are built in the areas where people want to live, there’s no problem. Sure, maybe not everyone will be able to live smack in the center of Amsterdam, but there’s enough space in other parts of the city, not to mention nearby places like Amstelveen, Hoofddorp or Almere (which, you will know, house mostly ‘overflow’ from the Amsterdam market).
- codedokode 3y ago
  If you want to create a fair system you should also build infrastructure otherwise it is unfair when someone lives near the subway in a historical part of the city and someone has to live near the forest among ugly modern high-rise buildings.
  - Jensson 3y ago
    That is how things are done all over Europe though. The state plans a new suburb by also planning bus stops, roads, subways, trains, parks, shopping malls and schools within walking distance etc. That ensures there are no really bad homes so even the cheap homes are in nice livable areas. It isn't expensive to build such areas, so there is no reason not to do it except if you want to punish the poor.
    - bombcar 3y ago
      Almost by definition the cheapest homes will be the “worst” homes so the goal is to make them as less bad as you can.