3 ms·
Yes, but housing market is a market, so for owners to have a ROI on their houses, the supply needs to be lower than the demand. Usually the way governments "pa
by xzjis 2y ago
Yes, but housing market is a market, so for owners to have a ROI on their houses, the supply needs to be lower than the demand.
Usually the way governments "patch" this is by building social houses and apartments, but if you were building enough of them then people would rent or buy them instead of the other private ones. So, again, it would make home owners unhappy to not have their investment go up.
I don't know if it's the same in all countries, but in France, 3.5% of households own 50% of the homes rented by individuals. So it's not even a problem for people buying a home for themselves, or a second home as a passive income, but it's a problem because it's highly concentrated. And they're the ones who want to have their investment to go up, at any cost.
- matt-p 2y agoSame in the UK. I think we can choose any number of options to maintain this; We keep building houses until house prices are stagnant and do not grow any more. Honestly even if houses lost ~1% of their value almost no-body would be underwater on their mortgage. a bunch of specific areas to "build 100K homes" and have the government garentee to buy anyones house in that area at any time in the the next 25 years for the value of it on the scheme announcement date. Existing home owners dont lose.