4 ms·
> I will not be able to properly argue this point, so I will instead point to the words of who can do it better: I read the whole blog with an open mind, but i
by jjav 2y ago
> I will not be able to properly argue this point, so I will instead point to the words of who can do it better:
I read the whole blog with an open mind, but it doesn't in any way address how he'd propose making housing not be a valuable asset. It really just reads like a long rant.
Housing is valuable (we all agree, otherwise these discussion about how to acquire it would not happen). How, exactly, could something that is valuable not be wealth?
- afiori 2y agothe problem is not that housing is wealth, but that housing is a financial intrument. In the current system the housing subsidies are not structured to facilitate buying a house using debt by people that do not have access to enough capital, rather they are designed to be a profitable financial instrument to be repackaged and sold. One solution for example is to build more cheaper less profitable housing
- jjav 2y ago> the problem is not that housing is wealth, but that housing is a financial intrument. I agree that a house is a home and should always be seen as a home, it is not a stock certificate. But perception aside, what would this mean? If something is wealth, how would it not be a financial instrument? > In the current system the housing subsidies are not structured to facilitate buying a house using debt by people that do not have access to enough capital, rather they are designed to be a profitable financial instrument to be repackaged and sold. Can you expand on what this means? I know mortgages are repackaged and sold, but a mortgage is not the house. > One solution for example is to build more cheaper less profitable housing Well, sure. But how to attract home builders to build at a loss?
- fragmede 2y agogive them money so they're not, aka subsidies