4 ms·
The article notes that the properties are seen as a safe place to store money. Surely government services directly contribute to the increasing or at least sta
by alwaysdoit 14y ago
The article notes that the properties are seen as a safe place to store money. Surely government services directly contribute to the increasing or at least stable value of these properties? Or do you believe that those condos would hold their value just as well if there were no police force in NYC?
- nandemo 14y ago> The article notes that the properties are seen as a safe place to store money. But that isn't true. Real estate isn't that safe in the first place, and they are also throwing money away by not renting it. They'd do better in buying a commercial property and renting it out.
- oijaf888 14y agoWhy do you feel real estate in Manhattan (especially at the locations mentioned) isn't that safe? Some of those places have been premium properties for almost 100 years.
- mahyarm 14y agoThere is a phenomena of buying real estate in stable countries as a complicated bank account for wealthy people from unstable countries. It's like buying a pile of gold to them, except a house is harder to steal. Vancouver is suffering from this with wealthy mainland chinese, leading to the second worst affordability ratio (housing price : average annual income) in the world. You see similar behaviors in condos in china itself. It has very bad effects for the people who already live there, especially for the young and newly established. Younger people with better opportunities go away once they do the math and the cities eventually suffer brain drain. I would suggest a high long term unoccupied residence tax to avoid the problems of unused property in cities. Hopefully it will prod these people just a little bit to hire property management companies to avoid the tax and rent the places out.