• Commiunism@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    I’m curious how many houses/apartments are unused in the US, acting as a speculative asset and if building more is even necessary.

    • Lyrl@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      If enough more houses are built that prices stop increasing faster than inflation, housing will no longer be valuable as a speculative asset. Building more houses BOTH makes housing immediately available, and changes the market forces in a way that pushes out investors squatting on un-lived-in units.

    • Transient Punk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Building more is necessary if the available housing is not located where appropriate employment is located. Thus, the gross number of available homes isn’t a good metric to use for determining the actual need for new construction.

  • Farid@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    As usual, the blue choice is obviously much better than the red choice, but only in comparison to this bat shit crazy red choice. On it’s own, the blue choice is still rather bad.

    I’m starting to think that Republicans just exist to make the bad Democrat options look always better in comparison.

      • Zombie@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Your comment made me think of this spoken piece at the end of Anti-Police Aggro by Oi Polloi.

        “Revolution isn’t a thing that happens overnight. It’s not a thing that - the orgasmic storming of Buckingham Palace and everything’s all right in the morning, we’ve got a revolutionary society. We’ve got to realize that as things get harder - when we have a revolution, when we’re headed towards a revolution things’ll be harder still - and when we’ve obtained our revolution it doesn’t stop - it continues on and on and on and on - It continues on until WE are the moderates. Right? When we are the moderates that’s when we have a revolution. When ordinary people say “Anarchists? Ah, fuck - they’re a load of fuckin liberals - they don’t believe in revolution at all, ah, fuckin hell they’re useless, like, you know” - Yeah, that’s what I wanna see. That’s what I’m fuckin’ fighting for.”

        • Optional@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          Well said. Yes, this is what self-identified-“leftists” miss out on. Their dismissal of Democrats is based in a child’s fantasy of politics. In the real world, you have to win the election, move everybody up one, win another election, move everybody up one, win another election, etc. In the meantime, republiQans kick everybody back at-least-two either way, and the cycle repeats.

          Magical leftist thinking says we all vote for gay space communism and tomorrow BAM it’s replicators and free energy. Alas. There exists a timeline where that is at least sort-of-possible - but we ain’t in it right now.

          • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            Leftism, at least the version currently prevalent on Lemmy, is literally religious thinking. There’s in-groups and saints and prophets and holy scripture and a Rapture everyone keeps waiting for.

  • bufalo1973@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    I have one “weird” and “radical” proposal: public housing to rent. Not to but. At affordable price. That would lower the price of every house, flat, …

  • Marthirial@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    So the mass deportation would be of lawful alien residents, because undocumented residents cannot buy houses unless it is straight up cash, and even then would have a hard time getting insurance or utilities, you know, without a SSN, credit history or IDs. Unless they use a stolen SSN, which is very difficult and rare.

    • microphone900@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Nope! Everyone knows undocumented immigrants are buying ALL the houses, they’re taking ALL the jobs, and getting ALL the public benefits (except for the benefits welfare queens get), they’re bringing in and doing ALL the drugs, they’re committing ALL the crime, and they’re voting in ALL elections. It’s true, I saw it on the TV. They’re busy, I don’t know how they have the time to do all of that.

      You know, it seems kind of ridiculous when typing it all out like that. Were the TV people lying to me? Can’t be; now excuse me, I’m going to tell my employees to keep working after clocking out and use the savings to buy several blocks of housing and rent them out at high rates. Their poor time management is not my problem.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    Neither choice is great. One is evil.

    That 25k quickly becomes “oh, everyone had 25k more so we can charge 25k more”.

    Don’t give rich house builders tax breaks, they’re the ones causing the problem by deliberately not building enough. You’re the fucking government. Build houses yourselves. Rent them through social housing programs.

    • HasturInYellow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      The builders have made the 16 million empty homes in this country because they were just selling them to corporations. It’s not that they are not hiding enough, it’s that the rich have engulfed the entire pipe with their gluttonous mouths and there is nothing left for the rest of us.

      When will we finally slay the beasts that are killing us?

    • MrMcGasion@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      I’ve started to come around on the 25k down payment assistance. It definitely has it’s problems, and there will absolutely be those who gouge because of it. But because it’s specifically down-payment assistance it will still help first time buyers get mortgages on houses they can afford the regular payments on, but don’t have the extra to set aside for a 10% down payment because rent is taking everything they could be setting aside for a down payment. And it’s limited to first time home buyers, with 2 years of on-time rent payments, and says “up to” 25k. Wouldn’t surprise me if it ends up being limited to 10% of the purchase price (which gets you more favorable loan terms).

      • Psychadelligoat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        My wife and I only own our home because her wealthy dad was willing to front about half of the down payment with an interest-free repayment to him alongside the mortgage. With 25k from the government we’d not have needed that, and we got an acre in California. 25k is huge.

        We’ve only ever had trouble with this mortgage once, and it was trouble we could have managed without help had we just tightened our belts for a while (just don’t go to the ER. Even if you have insurance. Even if you’re dying on the floor and an ex first responder demands you to for your safety: die instead. I am not joking, had it not been for familial help we’d be paying it off for the next 5 years and it would eat almost all of the little savings we’ve finally started managing to build up, so one more bump and we’d lose fucking everything), so it looks like all those “well sure you can afford rent that’s 1.5x the cost of the potential mortgage, but how do we know you can afford it on the job you’ve had for 8 years?” Pricks were wrooooooooooong

      • Blackmist@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Yeah, that too.

        The precious “free markets” have had their crack at it, and have shown that they’re not to be trusted to either own or build them. Prices have soared and that’s 100% intentional on their part.

        • Shard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          It was never a free market because of antiquated zoning laws. At very least free market would have driven more dense residential construction because they would have made more return on their buck. We need to allow and even promote medium rise residential zoning in more home scarcity is an issue.

          Land owners be damned, the needs of the many outweigh the greed of the few.

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Most builders are already fully booked for work. The one’s that could work faster generally aren’t the ones you want building your house.

    • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      It’s not that they aren’t building enough. It’s that they are building big luxury homes because there is a bigger profit margin than making affordable homes.

    • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      25k is for first time home buyers, not everyone. You can’t have separate prices for first time buyers and the rest of the public, and a seller won’t know how you are financed until after the house is listed anyways.

      This absolutely will help, because if you’d just ask anyone trying to get a home, the down payment is the hardest part to satisfy.

      The only way a house cartel can form like this is for those that own the homes. The builders don’t own the homes, corporations do. Those corporations collude and price fix to create a cartel. Focus on that.

      • ECB@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        The UK had a similar scheme for first time buyers and it’s often cited by economists as one of the biggest things fueling their housing crisis.

        • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          Its hard to take that at face value. The UK and the US have a lot of anti consumer perspectives.

          Do you have anything that describes the mechanism?

          Its sort of a similar arguement to food stamps raising food prices right?

          In either case its on the groups abusing a rule that are the problem, not the rule. There can be well worded regulations that minimize abuse, and we can also audit things.

          • ECB@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            Sure, here’s a paper which explores the effects.

            Essentially, housing prices have hugely inflated (in much of the developed world) because demand is much higher than supply. Prices in the real-estate market are generally really reactive to changes in supply or demand because each ‘product’ is unique and limited, as well as being worth a lot of money so there is more pressure to maximize the potential gains.

            This sort of plan increases the resources available to the demand side without increasing the supply side. This drives up prices since there are more potential buyers.

            Anyone who couldn’t buy a house without such a program is being added the the pool of people competing for a limited supply of houses. It won’t increase supply because supply is heavily limited by other factors, most notably zoning.

            It’s unfortunate, because the thought behind such a policy is admirable. It’s trying to make buying a house more fair and more easily achievable for a broad segment of the population that currently is effectively shut out from owning a home.

  • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    thinking that homeless illegal immigrants are the root cause of home shortage where a single corporation or a billionaire buys thousands of flats to rent them to people for exorbitant prices.

    in one way it works because if you kick out many homeless people out of the country, you can say that in one year you cut homelessness by half.

    • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Thats currently already done with jail. The main problem is homeless people don’t pay their jail bills. In my state 15 years ago it was 30$ per day you had to pay to be incarcerated in jail, not prison.

      • FundMECFS@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Okay america is sounding more and more like a joke. You have to pay to be in a processing facility? When you have no choice. And you’ll be incarcerated there during trial so before you are proven guilty of anything.

        • Optional@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          Fun fact! The Constitutional amendment that outlawed slavery also legalized slavery!

          Yeah! And until right now, this very minute, as you’re reading this, some Americans didn’t know that.

  • TrueStoryBob@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    Quick reminder: The Nazi German government emptied out Eastern European towns and villages taken by the Wehrmacht during various campaigns, most notably Operation Barbarossa, for resettlement of “pure” Germans to those occupied lands (called Lebensraum)… this started almost literally once these occupied towns and villages were far enough from the front lines. Also, the whole point of the US Government’s genocidal forced march of native tribes, often referred to as the Tail of Tears, was to clear said native tribes out so the Southern aristocracy could seize the land for plantations worked by chattel slaves… whole swaths of what is today Florida, Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi were settled by whites as a result.

    Many a “populist” (read: Fascist or proto-Fascist) operate their politics in this manner. Promise either cheap land (or, at the very least, housing) to the workers and others by committing what is, on it’s face, a genocide. There’s more modern examples (two in particular, going on right this minute for all the world to see), but I don’t want to get the ban-hammer so I won’t name them directly (I forgot to check the instance in which I am commenting before doing so, but not taking my chances).

    • daddy32@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Additionally, “Mass deportation” is a fucking genocide, I don’t know how this can even be said loudly. Guess people never learn…

        • gallopingsnail@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          Pretty much any time in human history where someone has tried to displace that many people, they’ve either failed or it turned into an ethnic cleansing.

            • intensely_human@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 months ago

              This wouldn’t be rounding people up based on their ethnicity.

              • It would not be rounding people up
              • It would not be based on ethnicity

              Instead:

              • It would be applying a particular dispatch when people encounter the legal system
              • It would be based on legal status

              So in the same way that a government could have a policy like

              IF you are stopped while driving drunk THEN you will be put in a jail cell for drunk people

              this would be a policy like

              IF you are brought into custody and we determine you’re here illegally THEN we will deport you

              So no, this isn’t in any way like rounding people up (ie performing a dragnet across all of society to ferret people out) based on ethnicity. Like, at all.

        • blockheadjt@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          Let’s say you suddenly got yanked from your home and sent to live in the land of your ancestors (where you don’t have a home or any friends). Would you survive?

          If yes, ask yourself again, but now you’re broke and have a medical condition and you require medication to survive. How about now?

          These people getting deported don’t have 2nd homes they can return to, and they can’t just put one on a credit card.

          Don’t like homelessness? Mass deportation creates homelessness crises.

  • Shapillon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    I don’t know how it is in the USA but here in France we kinda have the following issues:

    • People leave the countryside and small cities en masse
    • Houses rot empty anywhere that’s more than a commute away from a big city
    • There’s a huge shortage of housing in the cities

    We need people coming back to the countryside and small cities but all the employment is bundled away in big cities…

    • Match!!@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      it’s sorta like that but with way more opioid deaths

      edit: and instead of rotting empty, megacorporations buy the empty homes and turn them into airBnBs to keep the house prices high. maybe that happens in france too?

    • TrueStoryBob@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      I’m here in Georgia, USA. The small towns in my state, those well outside the major metro suburbs, are either emptying out OR the state is bringing in non-union factory and data center jobs to dominate the local economy with the promise of jobs and economic revitalization. These companies are given huge tax incentives to build (or relocate) and thus contribute nothing to local coffers directly (necessitating higher property and sales taxes on locals). Currently, there’s a car plant being built near where I live. The locals in the rural areas were shocked to find out after construction began that their water wells might stop working as the factory and it’s subsequent suppliers setting up in the area will be draining the county dry… the state said they could. They’re out of pocket to drill deeper wells and the state doesn’t care… at the state level, they’ve actually made it harder (legally through environmental review) for local municipalities to direct the development of water infrastructure but easier for private developers (who have fewer reviews to go through) to just build whatever water infrastructure they see fit. Meanwhile, back in town, a handful of out of state multibillion dollar corporations are buying up any and all real estate that isn’t nailed down and renting it back to us at exorbitant prices.

    • bufalo1973@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      WFH, better communications, give benefits to anyone opening business in a small town, …

      • Shapillon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        And financial support for non chain shops. We need a small locally owned economy too.

        Also we used to have a very dense train network that we let rot because iT wAsN’t PrOfItAbLe (and then we spent hundred of millions on roads ajd highways of course)

  • njm1314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    I still can’t get over the other lack of journalistic integrity for CBS to put that up there. To concede that point. Like it’s a fact. Utter bollocks.

    • YeetPics@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Republicans: mass deport legal residents (this one is much more morally balanced (lol you’re retarded))

  • tweeks@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    I’d say the middle ground of learning from your mistakes and focussing on having less children in the future is perhaps something to consider.

    In the meantime you should get enough chairs.