4 ms·

What do you do about all the homeowners who are now paying for a home that has lost value? They just take a walk? What about the sellers who can't sell their ho

What do you do about all the homeowners who are now paying for a home that has lost value? They just take a walk? What about the sellers who can't sell their house for what they owe now? They just take the same walk? And the banks and mortgage backed securities, even the stable ones, are now worth jack? What about the 401K accounts that now lose 20% or their value because it was all piled on housing related funds unbeknownst to the investor? It amounts to a mass seizure and redistribution, except those who were seized from still have to pay back what they borrowed, so it's even worse!

recursive 1y ago
Affordable housing seems in direct conflict to the interests of those using their home as an investment or store of value, strategically or not. As a home owner, I think the best move for the country as a whole probably doesn't align with the financial interests of the current home-owning class. The idea of a home as investment seems to inevitably cause this kind of conflict.
- jvanderbot 1y ago
  That's only part of the problem. It doesn't need to be an investment, but causing a purchased item, one that is almost exclusively purchased with loans, to plummet in value burdens purchasers for decades with needless payments. Might as well just garnish wages and redistribute to your chosen demographic
  - recursive 1y ago
    We got ourselves into this. Getting out will be painful but I don't see any other way out.
  - Ericson2314 1y ago
    We're gonna bail these leveraged-to-the-gills normies out, with profits to them, on the condition that SFH ownership society is destroyed — never again. Only condo homeowners, and people living in truely rural areas "irrationally", will remain.
- Ericson2314 1y ago
  You are right we have a stupid set up, but actually there is an easy way out: a lot of SFH get turned into dense apartments, and a lot of homeowners get rich as hell because they own the land. We should have a LVT, so the landholders don't get too rich, but it can be a bit lower than ideal (which would mean that conversion to apartment is break even because future earnings - cap ex and taxes net out)

recursive 1y ago

Affordable housing seems in direct conflict to the interests of those using their home as an investment or store of value, strategically or not. As a home owner, I think the best move for the country as a whole probably doesn't align with the financial interests of the current home-owning class. The idea of a home as investment seems to inevitably cause this kind of conflict.

jvanderbot 1y ago
That's only part of the problem. It doesn't need to be an investment, but causing a purchased item, one that is almost exclusively purchased with loans, to plummet in value burdens purchasers for decades with needless payments. Might as well just garnish wages and redistribute to your chosen demographic
- recursive 1y ago
  We got ourselves into this. Getting out will be painful but I don't see any other way out.
- Ericson2314 1y ago
  We're gonna bail these leveraged-to-the-gills normies out, with profits to them, on the condition that SFH ownership society is destroyed — never again. Only condo homeowners, and people living in truely rural areas "irrationally", will remain.
Ericson2314 1y ago
You are right we have a stupid set up, but actually there is an easy way out: a lot of SFH get turned into dense apartments, and a lot of homeowners get rich as hell because they own the land. We should have a LVT, so the landholders don't get too rich, but it can be a bit lower than ideal (which would mean that conversion to apartment is break even because future earnings - cap ex and taxes net out)