377
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] EnderMB@lemmy.world 12 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

The plan to make housing affordable has been known for years, decades even.

You don't cut prices, because it means cash-rich buyers will buy up the stock as investment in the long-term.

You don't (only) give people money to buy, because you're giving money to people that own property as a portfolio piece.

You:

  • Freeze rent so that any increases fall below inflation, making it a long-term loss, but stable in the very short term.
  • Provide opportunities for people to buy their rental properties, with tax incentives for those that sell at a cheaper rate.
  • Freeze house prices and gradually drop over the long-term, so that they are a slowly depreciating asset.
  • Assist those that wish to buy their rental properties.
  • (Forgot to add this) Agree a gradual drop over the space of several years to push the price of a house down.

This gives those that own multiple houses the means to sell property with a one-time tax benefit. You'll lose money initially, but in the long term people can afford houses and the market will move on from property as an investment piece. The reason no one wants to do this is because it'll take years to come to fruition, and most leadership terms aren't that long.

[-] HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago

You're right this won't help - all it will do is push up the average house price by 25k. Freezing prices won't do anything except drive shortage and lower quality property. Everything you mentioned will work once until people realize they can take advantage of it. We've seen it before - price freezes don't help.

It is well known what we need to do.

  • make property a bad investment. Heavily tax vacant properties and ownership of multiple, improve renters rights, increase interest rates for investment purchases. The goal is to drive down Qd quickly, reducing the value of other owned properties.

  • significantly drive up quality housing stock - Increase of Qs. Tax breaks for new builds, government rent to own, density and infrastructure increases. No tax on new builds owned for 10 years. Longer plan that solves long term.

[-] EnderMB@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

Haha, I realised that I forgot the last point!

You're right, freezing won't stop it, because it's still a stable place to keep your money. What needs to happen once frozen is that prices need to be continually dropped over a long period.

Obviously, more housing is key, and helps push current owners towards selling sooner rather than later. The problem with housing stock, which we've seen in the UK and Ireland, is that the quality of "affordable" housing stock is often hilariously bad. Corners are cut, homes are too hot/cold to be considered safe, and issues like cladding that breaks the law is pushed back to the owner to fix instead of those that broke the law. That's why it needs to be gradual and methodological.

load more comments (1 replies)
this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2024
377 points (96.3% liked)

politics

18821 readers
4596 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS