4 ms·

It appears that %6.9 of the houses for rent in USA are vacant: https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/files/currenthvspress.pdf https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/f

by mrtksn 2y ago

It appears that %6.9 of the houses for rent in USA are vacant: https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/files/currenthvspress.pdf https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/files/currenthvspress.pdf Is this efficient?

micromacrofoot 2y ago
american housing is optimized for investment, not living
- rcpt 2y ago
  Land Value Tax would solve it
  - Retric 2y ago
    Land value taxes alone don’t do crap. You need a high enough tax burden to compel people to change, and those levels are extremely unpopular.
  - amazingamazing 2y ago
    Land is already taxed on value
    - rcpt 2y ago
      There's no federal tax on Land. States often don't tax on current market value (Prop 13 for example)
      - amazingamazing 2y ago
        Voters should remove that - California has more renters than owners.
        rcpt 2y ago
        Absolutely. The opposition is strong and well organized. But the population is suffering.
rat87 2y ago
Likely a chunk of that is in cities or places in the countryside that have seen depopulation
wk_end 2y ago
You don't want a maximally "efficient" vacancy rate (i.e. 0), because that makes it basically impossible for people to move around - and that gives enormous power to landlords to gouge tenants. So what vacancy rate do you want, ideally? Not sure, but you'll notice from your own source that 6.9% is around as low a vacancy rate as the US has had since the turn of the millennium. FWIW, looking at vacancy statistics across the whole of the country can be misleading. They include houses that are vacant for any reason - including properties that are condemned, under renovation, or in the middle of nowhere where there are no jobs. That latter point is key. As more and more economic activity has moved to white-collar coastal cities and away from rural or suburban blue-collar middle America, it's no surprise there are going to be vacancies in regions where the economy's been hollowed out. So we can conjecture that the record low vacancy rate is even more problematic, because those vacancies are likely less equally distributed to areas that need them.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
yonran 2y ago
Places with a higher vacancy rate are correlated with lower rents and less homelessness e.g. Indiana and Texas have a higher rental vacancy rate than California and New York (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1CuFs https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1CuFs) so whatever causes a higher vacancy rate seems to be good for affordability (not sure what you mean by “efficient”).
renewiltord 2y ago
I was trying to explain this to my wife the other day. She was complaining that I had all these clothes on the floor in the bedroom and that she couldn't get out of bed easily because it was so messy (because I efficiently store some electronics under the clothes) but I explained that most of the house was still empty, especially by volume (since the air above the clothes is completely unoccupied). Fortunately, because I am rational and have data on my side, she relented as she usually does.
tyoma 2y ago
From a quick spot check… yes? Assume 120 homes in an area, evenly distributed per month on yearly leases. If all renters switch every month and it takes a month to re-rent the unit, there is a vacancy rate of 8.3% Obviously not every renter moves every lease end, but also some units are in places no one wants to live, others are mispriced, some need renovation or extensive cleaning, etc. But from a cursory sanity check the 6.9% number is likely reasonable for a fairly tight rental market.

by mrtksn 2y ago

micromacrofoot 2y ago

american housing is optimized for investment, not living

rcpt 2y ago
Land Value Tax would solve it
- Retric 2y ago
  Land value taxes alone don’t do crap. You need a high enough tax burden to compel people to change, and those levels are extremely unpopular.
- amazingamazing 2y ago
  Land is already taxed on value
  - rcpt 2y ago
    There's no federal tax on Land. States often don't tax on current market value (Prop 13 for example)
    - amazingamazing 2y ago
      Voters should remove that - California has more renters than owners.
      - rcpt 2y ago
        Absolutely. The opposition is strong and well organized. But the population is suffering.

rat87 2y ago

Likely a chunk of that is in cities or places in the countryside that have seen depopulation

wk_end 2y ago

You don't want a maximally "efficient" vacancy rate (i.e. 0), because that makes it basically impossible for people to move around - and that gives enormous power to landlords to gouge tenants. So what vacancy rate do you want, ideally? Not sure, but you'll notice from your own source that 6.9% is around as low a vacancy rate as the US has had since the turn of the millennium. FWIW, looking at vacancy statistics across the whole of the country can be misleading. They include houses that are vacant for any reason - including properties that are condemned, under renovation, or in the middle of nowhere where there are no jobs. That latter point is key. As more and more economic activity has moved to white-collar coastal cities and away from rural or suburban blue-collar middle America, it's no surprise there are going to be vacancies in regions where the economy's been hollowed out. So we can conjecture that the record low vacancy rate is even more problematic, because those vacancies are likely less equally distributed to areas that need them.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

yonran 2y ago

Places with a higher vacancy rate are correlated with lower rents and less homelessness e.g. Indiana and Texas have a higher rental vacancy rate than California and New York (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1CuFs https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1CuFs) so whatever causes a higher vacancy rate seems to be good for affordability (not sure what you mean by “efficient”).

renewiltord 2y ago

I was trying to explain this to my wife the other day. She was complaining that I had all these clothes on the floor in the bedroom and that she couldn't get out of bed easily because it was so messy (because I efficiently store some electronics under the clothes) but I explained that most of the house was still empty, especially by volume (since the air above the clothes is completely unoccupied). Fortunately, because I am rational and have data on my side, she relented as she usually does.

tyoma 2y ago

From a quick spot check… yes? Assume 120 homes in an area, evenly distributed per month on yearly leases. If all renters switch every month and it takes a month to re-rent the unit, there is a vacancy rate of 8.3% Obviously not every renter moves every lease end, but also some units are in places no one wants to live, others are mispriced, some need renovation or extensive cleaning, etc. But from a cursory sanity check the 6.9% number is likely reasonable for a fairly tight rental market.