8 ms·

Also: Nobody in a village should take up 2 houses for themself. But some can, and can even take up 100 houses... so long as the other villagers are fighting am

by neilv 2y ago

Also: Nobody in a village should take up 2 houses for themself. But some can, and can even take up 100 houses... so long as the other villagers are fighting amongst themselves, over whether their house should be larger than that of their neighbor. Turns out most of their problems are arguably traceable back to those people with 100+ houses each. Which would be glaringly suspicious to an outside observer. But the villagers are too busy being enraged by the idea that some lazy person might not have to live in a tent.

keybored 2y ago
What’s ironic[1] about these comments is they set up these ignorant-sheep narrative about how the villagers are bickering among themselves. Which begets more finger-pointing among the villagers instead of looking at the real source of their problems. [1] Not ironic if you don’t think you’re one of the villagers.
- mistermann 2y ago
  It is a narrative, yes, but are you asserting that the narrative is not substantially true? I struggle to think of anyone I know of, let alone know personally, that is mostly on the systems analysis side of the spectrum vs the story telling and bickering side. Culture is constantly running in the background, teaching us not only what to think, but also how to think. And changing culture is hard.
  - keybored 2y ago
    I assert that there is no good evidence that it is true and that in lieu of good evidence it’s a limiting perspective to propagate. I know how the real world works and am not fooled by the bread and circus—of course I am! :) And how often do I reveal that in real life? Very rarely because I don’t have any sympaticos in my life right now. But how many people do I know who are like me? And to how many people do I look like an unconscious NPC on this issue? It’s a limiting perspective because you stay stuck in the mode of bickering among yourselves about who has seen the light and who hasn’t. Instead of the more useful perspective: that a non-insignificant people already know or that if they don’t then it won’t take much to convince them (X years of brainwashing does not take X years to undo).
    - mistermann 2y ago
      > I assert that there is no good evidence that it is true And what evidence could you provide (say, a description of your methodology, hours of search, resources searched, notes you've taken along the way, etc) can you offer to support your "is no good (how convenient) evidence"? > It’s a limiting perspective because you stay stuck in the mode of bickering among yourselves about who has seen the light and who hasn’t. That may seem to be the case, but maybe ~no one has seen the light (perhaps due to a culturally infused unwillingness to try)? > Instead of the more useful perspective... You have no way of knowing the utility of either approach. Realizing this (including how to realize it) is highly useful. > then it won’t take much to convince them (X years of brainwashing does not take X years to undo). I agree with this, except for the "won’t take much to convince them", as it could be mistaken to mean that finding the method also won't take much. But I will always upvote optimism!
      - keybored 2y ago
        > And what evidence could you provide (say, a description of your methodology, hours of search, resources searched, notes you've taken along the way, etc) can you offer to support your "is no good (how convenient) evidence"? What evidence do I have prepared for random strangers on the Internet who are as disagreeable as me? None! I will protest bare (uncited, shooting from the hips) “common wisdom” and counter with my own uncited perspective; mine is on the face of it no less wrong! Why the hell would I just let such misanthropic, holier-than-thou garbage philosophies remain unexamined?! EDIT: Three sentences in a row with exclamation marks might have been overkill. :smile:
- neilv 2y ago
  Excellent point. You could look at it as very resilient diversion -- even calling out the diversion becomes a diversion. I'm wondering how often it happens organically, and how often it has some conscious help.
- pimlottc 2y ago
  And what in your opinion is the real source?
  - keybored 2y ago
    I didn’t dispute the source. I questioned the assumption that “people” (whatever that means?) are oblivious to it.
gruez 2y ago
>Also: Nobody in a village should take up 2 houses for themself. >But some can, and can even take up 100 houses... How much % of the housing supply is actually taken up by people with 100 houses?
- cduzz 2y ago
  Ever wonder about who can afford to make all-cash, above ask offers on houses? Or you can rent that house after the PE firm buys it and rents it out... https://www.propublica.org/article/when-private-equity-becomes-your-landlord https://www.propublica.org/article/when-private-equity-becom... https://www.thesling.org/are-hedge-funds-and-private-equity-firms-driving-up-the-cost-of-housing-2 https://www.thesling.org/are-hedge-funds-and-private-equity-...
  - gruez 2y ago
    >Or you can rent that house after the PE firm buys it and rents it out... That's fine? It's still contributing to the housing supply, it's not like they're hoarding the houses. Moreover unless you want to ban rentals entirely, you're going by definition need people owning more than one house. Finally, the fact that rents are sky-high as well, suggests that housing is expensive in general, not only home ownership.
    - lenerdenator 2y ago
      It's fine if you're trying to keep people off the streets. It's not fine if you're trying to keep a middle class.
      - gruez 2y ago
        >Finally, the fact that rents are sky-high as well, suggests that housing is expensive in general, not only home ownership.
        cduzz 2y ago
        There's a "cartel as a service" / rent fixing software system for that... https://www.propublica.org/article/yieldstar-rent-increase-realpage-rent https://www.propublica.org/article/yieldstar-rent-increase-r... I believe the correct response here is "That's wonderful! It lets everyone get in on the benefit of being a slumlord without the hassle of shaking down your tenants. Now you can just buy shares in this instead!"
toomuchtodo 2y ago
Institutional housing ownership in the US is not a material contributor to housing price inflation [1]. With that said, we are approaching a housing shortage of +4.5M [2] units, and in concert with YieldStar's Backpage revenue maximization engine [3] (which is laundering landlord price fixing), renters are being squeezed (because where are you going to go if you can't afford to buy? you will pay, or you will be homeless, which certain jurisdictions are attempting to or have outlawed). To solve housing for those who need housing, enact state level YIMBY policies to override local planning (who will always kowtow to local folks who show up to say no, and local folks who say no because it costs them nothing to do so as they already own), provide cheap money to builders [4], and build as fast as you can. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_and_impact_of_institutional_investment_in_housing_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_and_impact_of_institut... [2] https://zillow.mediaroom.com/2024-06-18-The-U-S-is-now-short-4-5-million-homes-as-the-housing-deficit-grows https://zillow.mediaroom.com/2024-06-18-The-U-S-is-now-short... [3] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=yieldstar&sort=byDate&type=story https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... [4] https://www.startribune.com/janet-yellen-minneapolis-treasury-fund-affordable-housing-financing-program/600375838/ https://www.startribune.com/janet-yellen-minneapolis-treasur... (Edit: I would still support restriction of investment ownership of housing, depending on implementation details; you have to defend the young from the old and Capital, as they are treating the young as cattle to be squeezed for all they've got simply by virtue of their existence timeline [5] [6], and it's causing folks to simply give up) [5] https://www.ted.com/talks/scott_galloway_how_the_us_is_destroying_young_people_s_future https://www.ted.com/talks/scott_galloway_how_the_us_is_destr... [6] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K64GTDwWJo4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K64GTDwWJo4 (as always, think in systems)
- quacked 2y ago
  A 4.5M unit shortage wouldn't be present if the past several administrations hadn't allowed huge amounts of immigration in the past decade. Reality isn't constrained to "you have to build as fast as possible since your population is going to increase very quickly and there's nothing you can do about that". If every person who came to the US in the past ten years went home, there would be a colossal increase in housing availability and rent prices would crater.
neilv 2y ago
Instead of "house", you could also imagine a similar analogy around "amount of apples one person needs to eat to live". The sociopathic villager who went to the village's communal trees, and took way more apples than they can ever eat, while others don't have enough apples to eat, should be tossed into the lake. But the sociopathic villager tells stories in the village square, of how those villagers who are starving are lazy, and trying to eat apples without working to gather them. A village elder starts to say they saw the sociopath going and taking the apples under the cover of darkness, and that's why some people are starving. But the sociopath quietly welcomes the elder into the fold of those who have cellars full of more apples than they can eat. Then apple hoarding is suddenly the noble way of the ancestors, according to the elder. And, hey, look over there, at those lazy people over there trying to eat apples while working only a half day! Hate those greedy freeloaders, over there! The housing crisis is one example, but I'm not talking about which parties have literally 100 houses in real society (nor want to get diverted with "just let developers make more money, by building more, and stop looking at any other factors of the problem"). I'm talking about essentials, greed, and corruption more generally.
- philwelch 2y ago
  I have a better analogy. It’s the analogy of a guy who got up every morning to plant apple trees in his orchard. When the time came for harvest, he picked all of the apples and sold them to market. With his proceeds, he bought some more land from his neighbor and planted even more apple trees. The next year there were too many apples for him to pick by himself so he hired a few people to help out, and used the proceeds to expand his orchard. There was another man in the village who never planted a tree or picked an apple. Instead he sat in his house filled with envy and resentment at the apple farmer, and made up a bunch of ridiculous stories about how the apple farmer was stealing from everyone else. And so he found all of the other villagers he could sway, and inspired envy in their hearts. And the envy and resentment and hatred grew and grew until one night, they went to the orchard and burned down all the apple trees and the man’s house while he and his family slept inside. And then they all celebrated their crime. Of course, when no one else in the village ever planted an apple orchard ever again, there were murmurs of complaint. The town baker couldn’t bake his famous apple pies the next fall, but he knew better to complain because he didn’t want the envious mob showing up at his bakery in the middle of the night. So he kept quiet. The housing crisis is one example, but I’m not talking about which parties have obstructed the creation of wealth in real society. I’m talking about essentials, envy and corruption more generally.
philwelch 2y ago
How do you imagine villages actually worked? An extremely common way was that the entire village would be owned by one man who would collect rent from all of the villagers.
shuntress 2y ago
My extreme political opinion is that no one should be allowed to own more than one property in which they do not reside.

by neilv 2y ago

keybored 2y ago

What’s ironic[1] about these comments is they set up these ignorant-sheep narrative about how the villagers are bickering among themselves. Which begets more finger-pointing among the villagers instead of looking at the real source of their problems. [1] Not ironic if you don’t think you’re one of the villagers.

mistermann 2y ago
It is a narrative, yes, but are you asserting that the narrative is not substantially true? I struggle to think of anyone I know of, let alone know personally, that is mostly on the systems analysis side of the spectrum vs the story telling and bickering side. Culture is constantly running in the background, teaching us not only what to think, but also how to think. And changing culture is hard.
- keybored 2y ago
  I assert that there is no good evidence that it is true and that in lieu of good evidence it’s a limiting perspective to propagate. I know how the real world works and am not fooled by the bread and circus—of course I am! :) And how often do I reveal that in real life? Very rarely because I don’t have any sympaticos in my life right now. But how many people do I know who are like me? And to how many people do I look like an unconscious NPC on this issue? It’s a limiting perspective because you stay stuck in the mode of bickering among yourselves about who has seen the light and who hasn’t. Instead of the more useful perspective: that a non-insignificant people already know or that if they don’t then it won’t take much to convince them (X years of brainwashing does not take X years to undo).
  - mistermann 2y ago
    > I assert that there is no good evidence that it is true And what evidence could you provide (say, a description of your methodology, hours of search, resources searched, notes you've taken along the way, etc) can you offer to support your "is no good (how convenient) evidence"? > It’s a limiting perspective because you stay stuck in the mode of bickering among yourselves about who has seen the light and who hasn’t. That may seem to be the case, but maybe ~no one has seen the light (perhaps due to a culturally infused unwillingness to try)? > Instead of the more useful perspective... You have no way of knowing the utility of either approach. Realizing this (including how to realize it) is highly useful. > then it won’t take much to convince them (X years of brainwashing does not take X years to undo). I agree with this, except for the "won’t take much to convince them", as it could be mistaken to mean that finding the method also won't take much. But I will always upvote optimism!
    - keybored 2y ago
      > And what evidence could you provide (say, a description of your methodology, hours of search, resources searched, notes you've taken along the way, etc) can you offer to support your "is no good (how convenient) evidence"? What evidence do I have prepared for random strangers on the Internet who are as disagreeable as me? None! I will protest bare (uncited, shooting from the hips) “common wisdom” and counter with my own uncited perspective; mine is on the face of it no less wrong! Why the hell would I just let such misanthropic, holier-than-thou garbage philosophies remain unexamined?! EDIT: Three sentences in a row with exclamation marks might have been overkill. :smile:
neilv 2y ago
Excellent point. You could look at it as very resilient diversion -- even calling out the diversion becomes a diversion. I'm wondering how often it happens organically, and how often it has some conscious help.
pimlottc 2y ago
And what in your opinion is the real source?
- keybored 2y ago
  I didn’t dispute the source. I questioned the assumption that “people” (whatever that means?) are oblivious to it.

gruez 2y ago

>Also: Nobody in a village should take up 2 houses for themself. >But some can, and can even take up 100 houses... How much % of the housing supply is actually taken up by people with 100 houses?

cduzz 2y ago
Ever wonder about who can afford to make all-cash, above ask offers on houses? Or you can rent that house after the PE firm buys it and rents it out... https://www.propublica.org/article/when-private-equity-becomes-your-landlord https://www.propublica.org/article/when-private-equity-becom... https://www.thesling.org/are-hedge-funds-and-private-equity-firms-driving-up-the-cost-of-housing-2 https://www.thesling.org/are-hedge-funds-and-private-equity-...
- gruez 2y ago
  >Or you can rent that house after the PE firm buys it and rents it out... That's fine? It's still contributing to the housing supply, it's not like they're hoarding the houses. Moreover unless you want to ban rentals entirely, you're going by definition need people owning more than one house. Finally, the fact that rents are sky-high as well, suggests that housing is expensive in general, not only home ownership.
  - lenerdenator 2y ago
    It's fine if you're trying to keep people off the streets. It's not fine if you're trying to keep a middle class.
    - gruez 2y ago
      >Finally, the fact that rents are sky-high as well, suggests that housing is expensive in general, not only home ownership.
      - cduzz 2y ago
        There's a "cartel as a service" / rent fixing software system for that... https://www.propublica.org/article/yieldstar-rent-increase-realpage-rent https://www.propublica.org/article/yieldstar-rent-increase-r... I believe the correct response here is "That's wonderful! It lets everyone get in on the benefit of being a slumlord without the hassle of shaking down your tenants. Now you can just buy shares in this instead!"

toomuchtodo 2y ago

Institutional housing ownership in the US is not a material contributor to housing price inflation [1]. With that said, we are approaching a housing shortage of +4.5M [2] units, and in concert with YieldStar's Backpage revenue maximization engine [3] (which is laundering landlord price fixing), renters are being squeezed (because where are you going to go if you can't afford to buy? you will pay, or you will be homeless, which certain jurisdictions are attempting to or have outlawed). To solve housing for those who need housing, enact state level YIMBY policies to override local planning (who will always kowtow to local folks who show up to say no, and local folks who say no because it costs them nothing to do so as they already own), provide cheap money to builders [4], and build as fast as you can. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_and_impact_of_institutional_investment_in_housing_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_and_impact_of_institut... [2] https://zillow.mediaroom.com/2024-06-18-The-U-S-is-now-short-4-5-million-homes-as-the-housing-deficit-grows https://zillow.mediaroom.com/2024-06-18-The-U-S-is-now-short... [3] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=yieldstar&sort=byDate&type=story https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... [4] https://www.startribune.com/janet-yellen-minneapolis-treasury-fund-affordable-housing-financing-program/600375838/ https://www.startribune.com/janet-yellen-minneapolis-treasur... (Edit: I would still support restriction of investment ownership of housing, depending on implementation details; you have to defend the young from the old and Capital, as they are treating the young as cattle to be squeezed for all they've got simply by virtue of their existence timeline [5] [6], and it's causing folks to simply give up) [5] https://www.ted.com/talks/scott_galloway_how_the_us_is_destroying_young_people_s_future https://www.ted.com/talks/scott_galloway_how_the_us_is_destr... [6] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K64GTDwWJo4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K64GTDwWJo4 (as always, think in systems)

quacked 2y ago
A 4.5M unit shortage wouldn't be present if the past several administrations hadn't allowed huge amounts of immigration in the past decade. Reality isn't constrained to "you have to build as fast as possible since your population is going to increase very quickly and there's nothing you can do about that". If every person who came to the US in the past ten years went home, there would be a colossal increase in housing availability and rent prices would crater.

neilv 2y ago

Instead of "house", you could also imagine a similar analogy around "amount of apples one person needs to eat to live". The sociopathic villager who went to the village's communal trees, and took way more apples than they can ever eat, while others don't have enough apples to eat, should be tossed into the lake. But the sociopathic villager tells stories in the village square, of how those villagers who are starving are lazy, and trying to eat apples without working to gather them. A village elder starts to say they saw the sociopath going and taking the apples under the cover of darkness, and that's why some people are starving. But the sociopath quietly welcomes the elder into the fold of those who have cellars full of more apples than they can eat. Then apple hoarding is suddenly the noble way of the ancestors, according to the elder. And, hey, look over there, at those lazy people over there trying to eat apples while working only a half day! Hate those greedy freeloaders, over there! The housing crisis is one example, but I'm not talking about which parties have literally 100 houses in real society (nor want to get diverted with "just let developers make more money, by building more, and stop looking at any other factors of the problem"). I'm talking about essentials, greed, and corruption more generally.

philwelch 2y ago
I have a better analogy. It’s the analogy of a guy who got up every morning to plant apple trees in his orchard. When the time came for harvest, he picked all of the apples and sold them to market. With his proceeds, he bought some more land from his neighbor and planted even more apple trees. The next year there were too many apples for him to pick by himself so he hired a few people to help out, and used the proceeds to expand his orchard. There was another man in the village who never planted a tree or picked an apple. Instead he sat in his house filled with envy and resentment at the apple farmer, and made up a bunch of ridiculous stories about how the apple farmer was stealing from everyone else. And so he found all of the other villagers he could sway, and inspired envy in their hearts. And the envy and resentment and hatred grew and grew until one night, they went to the orchard and burned down all the apple trees and the man’s house while he and his family slept inside. And then they all celebrated their crime. Of course, when no one else in the village ever planted an apple orchard ever again, there were murmurs of complaint. The town baker couldn’t bake his famous apple pies the next fall, but he knew better to complain because he didn’t want the envious mob showing up at his bakery in the middle of the night. So he kept quiet. The housing crisis is one example, but I’m not talking about which parties have obstructed the creation of wealth in real society. I’m talking about essentials, envy and corruption more generally.

philwelch 2y ago

How do you imagine villages actually worked? An extremely common way was that the entire village would be owned by one man who would collect rent from all of the villagers.

shuntress 2y ago

My extreme political opinion is that no one should be allowed to own more than one property in which they do not reside.