3 ms·
One difficulty of lower-the-rent politics is that if you actually succeed in lowering rents, the news will report it as a bad thing.
by astrange 3y ago
One difficulty of lower-the-rent politics is that if you actually succeed in lowering rents, the news will report it as a bad thing.
- pm90 3y agoIn this case its housing prices that plunged, not rental rates. Are they correlated?
- astrange 3y agoThey aren't always correlated but they are in this case - Austin's rents are down because of new construction. (Which news headlines call "multifamily oversupply".)
- fullshark 3y agoThat's cause everyone actually wants to own a home that appreciates in value, they just want their entry point to be low.
- pixl97 3y agoOr that at least maintains value so you don't take a massive loss in the case you have to move.
- rpgwaiter 3y agoIdk if your home value went down, the whole market probably did too. So the house you’re trying to get next probably also is on sale.
- readthenotes1 3y agoIf you are underwater on the loan then you ain't moving.
- dools 3y agoI don’t see how it helps anyone but property investors when prices go up. Everyone has to live somewhere.
- astrange 3y agoAll homeowners are property investors, and it's their largest asset. If their children expect to inherit then they're also long-term property investors. Georgism is based on land taxes to avoid this distortionary motive.
- dools 3y agoBut prices go up at the same time so what's the difference. It's better than renting, but house prices going up isn't beneficial.
- twojobsoneboss 3y agoThere’s still arbitrage to be had - gains are often in percentage terms so when you downsize or move to a cheaper area you pocket the difference. You could also own more than one property, do sweat equity to increase value etc. I could go on.
- lazide 3y agoIf you own, chances are the house is your largest investment. If you rent, then sure.
- swatcoder 3y agoA sustainable and socially beneficial housing market has pretty flat prices, not meaningfully rising ones. Buyers put assets into a house not for an arbitrary gain on its resale value, but (1) so that they no longer need to pursue ongoing income for your own housing, or (2) so that they can sell flexible housing opportunities to renters. Both of these are sound, profitable investments grounded in developing actual value for people. This is essentially the natural state of housing when supply and demand are approximately in equilibrium (ignoring physical decay and subsequent depreciation). Even in the current housing crisis, many communities outside of major metros still looks this way. Housing as an abstract investment that perpetually and magically gains resale value with no material change in what its underlying real property is a modern fiction and is essentially just the result of a prolonged speculative bubble becoming culturally normalized. So yes, housing is a large investment for people, and very often their largest, but in a functioning and sustainable market, that investment is not valued by gross appreciation in resale value (the topic of discussion) but in ongoing dividends and value delivery. The GP is right to be skeptical.
- UtopiaPunk 3y agoHardly "everyone" wants that.