3 ms·
> They don't need the money. If you can afford a home in the area, you're already pretty well off. This is a part of the problem which I think isn't discussed
by vintermann 2y ago
> They don't need the money. If you can afford a home in the area, you're already pretty well off.
This is a part of the problem which I think isn't discussed often enough. Because of the varying marginal utility of money, if the divide between rich and poor becomes big enough, owners will not want to rent out in their own homes, because nothing the tenant can pay will make any significant difference to their personal budget, and certainly not enough to make up for the stress/risk.
Maybe they can find someone non-threatening enough where the benefit of having someone living in the cellar apartment, to discourage break-ins when they're away etc. makes up for the risk. That is, I guess, how I managed to get a rental in one of the most expensive parts of Oslo ~20 years ago. But I really doubt I'd gotten that if I wasn't extremely non-threatening, let alone if I had been a minority of some sort.
- mapt 2y agoThe really expensive neighborhoods are too desirable for anyone to live there. They exist as capital anchors for overseas sovereign wealth funds and various long-run finance concerns to sink into a deeper market than their own, to act as collateral for their business adventures and as a currency reserve hedged against local inflation. No rent you could pay is worth the risk. Low property taxes are highly conducive to this use-case, and notably, tenant residents can vote on raising property taxes and overseas sovereign wealth funds can't.