3 ms·
The solution lies in eliminating the entire concept of investment properties, and to classify single-homes as purely places to live. You do realize that part of
by clpm4j 1y ago
The solution lies in eliminating the entire concept of investment properties, and to classify single-homes as purely places to live. You do realize that part of "not enough" houses is due to corporate entities / investment vehicles / investors owning many properties.
And the types of cities (dense, highly-desirable urban cities like SF, London, Paris) where the NIMBY people complain most often also happen to be the most common markets for these investors to purchase/own multiple homes.
- socalgal2 1y ago> You do realize that part of "not enough" houses is due to corporate entities / investment vehicles / investors owning many properties. No, I do not realize this. This is only possible because of limited supply. If the supply was not limited by government and nimbys then it would not be profitable for "corporate entities / investment vehicles / investors owning many properties." It's also irrelevant, no amount of preventing "corporate entities / investment vehicles / investors owning many properties." will do anything to keep prices low as long as demand is high and supply is low.