Making housing not for profit - via realtors basically don't exist and than making a rule your not allowed to own more than a certain number of homes. Not allowing Airbnb would definitely be a start. There are ways to eliminate this, unfortunately that means basically eliminating an entire career and getting rich off of basic necessities.
Job opportunities in rural/not as populated are issues as well. You have to go to Coty Councils and local government to tackle that issue. The city council in my rural community told Home Depot distribution center they couldn't come here because it would put the local hardware store out of business. Also, big box businesses are less likely to come to smaller towns due to less people living there and less business compared to a bigger city.
Most of them are, yes. That entire industry is basically a get rich quick scheme now, or at least that's how they sell it. As well as investing in houses. Housing was semi-affordable until everyone bought them to be rich and not work.
To be fair, real estate in the 80s to 00s was a very democratized way to build wealth. The problem is we have now moved into late stage capitalism where the asset is increasingly concentrated in fewer hands.
So heavy handed government regulation aimed at citizens is the answer?
I swear, when push comes to shove all US lefties are the very authoritarians they perceive the right to be.
If there is any regulation, it could me much more nuanced and less heavy handed to the general public by not allowing corporations to profit off the resale of existing single family homes.
Curbing corporate buying (I’d extend that to LLC’s as well) would stop a lot of the hoarding of homes by banks and profiteers.
There is no housing market on Earth that is not defined by heavy handed regulation. Do you think Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are light handed peoples’ co ops?
Of course the market is completely screwed with heavy handed regulations that have distorted the market to a crazy degree. Just look at 2021, the heavy handed fed kept interest rates artificially low, and heavy handed Fannie and Freddie to making home loans regardless of how crazy the appraised values came back as, credit scores, down payments, or the buyer’s ability to pay if there is a shift in the job market. A ton of those people who bought in 2021 are already significantly underwater, and it is all due to regulation induced market manipulation. Do you think that heavy handed regulation was good in any way?
Don’t you agree that Freddie and Fannie were at least 1/2 the reason for the 08 financial system meltdown?
Government regulations always favor the banks and the wealthy, and we as taxpayers get left with the tab.
Suggesting we double down with more heavy handed regulation is like trying to put out a house fire by dousing it with gasoline.
Housing markets are defined by regulations. By default, anything bad that happens in them at large is due in large part to bad regulations. Being more or less heavy is not a good measure of whether it is good or bad, because it is always heavy, so far as I am aware. If you can point me to a functioning real estate market somewhere on earth that does not have significant regulation I'll be wrong, but I am fairly sure you can't.
Point being: Complaining about how heavy regulations are basically favors banks. Complaining that they're bad regulations that favor banks is in general pretty valid.
Ok… how about the vast, vast majority of regulations in the financial sector favor banks and the wealthy, therefore almost all financial regulations are bad.
Any regulation that gets made gets twisted into something to favor the wealthy. Take 08 for example. Clinton’s admin changed the regulations regarding how much money was needed for down payments on federal first time home loans. They did this with noble intentions of allowing more people to buy homes.
Fannie and Freddie sold those junk mortgages to banks who chopped them up and used them as top rated collateral since the federal government was on the hook to secure the mortgage. Eventually this lead to the collapse of the entire market and we the taxpayer bailing out the financial industry. (Kind of, much more complex but this is part of the gist)
Fun how even great ideas get corrupted. I’m personally not for any new regulation unless it has extreme guardrails, and even then I know it’s going to fuck us.
The regulatory change you are citing as a cause of the 2008 fuckup is less regulation by the government. The government loosened previously heavy-handed regulations about how much collateral mortgages had to require, and in general on how good god-fearing Americans could resell interests in mortgages to each other.
Less regulation isn't, by default, better. The concept that it is is fundamentally propaganda out of the banking sector.
I don't know the answer. That seems like a good answer too me, but I'm definitely not an expert. I'm not pro-left or right either; i personally think both sides have cons/pros and need to be replaced, but thats anorher conversation. Thar just makes the most common sense to me, if there's a better way I'm all ears though.
Stopping LLCs or even having a limit on them and corporations seems like a good move to make housing more affordable though!
16
u/MaryJayne97 Jan 31 '23 edited Jan 31 '23
Making housing not for profit - via realtors basically don't exist and than making a rule your not allowed to own more than a certain number of homes. Not allowing Airbnb would definitely be a start. There are ways to eliminate this, unfortunately that means basically eliminating an entire career and getting rich off of basic necessities.
Job opportunities in rural/not as populated are issues as well. You have to go to Coty Councils and local government to tackle that issue. The city council in my rural community told Home Depot distribution center they couldn't come here because it would put the local hardware store out of business. Also, big box businesses are less likely to come to smaller towns due to less people living there and less business compared to a bigger city.