• bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    Residentjal property shouldn’t be allowed to be an investment. Or heavily taxed to make it unprofitable unless you live there yourself.

    Why would anyone build new apartment buildings if that were the law? We desperately need to be building more housing, and denser housing.

    • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There also is a thing called public property. Some time ago our government build and owned buildings. Everyone had a cheap home. The moment you privatize a thing you become an investment.

      • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        So everyone needs to be able to spend the upfront capital to buy a home? What about people who want to rent? There are lots of advantages to not buying.

        • Bonskreeskreeskree@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          1 year ago

          The advantages you mention are a result of inflated values. Your parents generations could much more easily buy a property and decide to sell it within a few years to move somewhere else.

          • Uranium3006@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            back when I was growing up (I’m under 30) a normal middle class family could own a whole ass house with more rooms than people. today’s housing market is not normal

        • Neato@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Loans exist. And reduce the upfront cost in paperwork to buying a house. It shouldn’t cost nearly 5 figures just to get documents signed.

          • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            So instead of paying rent, you pay loan payments. And the bank can seize your property if you can’t pay. Sounds like six of one and a half-dozen of the other.

            • halowpeano@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              You’re still thinking within the current broken system. The only reason the bank can seize everything unfairly no matter how much had been repaid is because the laws allow it.

              • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Even if you ignore foreclosure, mortgaging still is often more expensive than renting on average in the short term. Because part of what you’re paying for in a mortgage is the fact that it has a finite length.

            • Blackout@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Rent keeps going up, my mortgage is the same regardless of that and I purchased based on what I could afford at that time.

              • aesthelete@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                My mortgage is gone because I paid it off. Which is an option, but not for renters who have to pay forever (and in many cases, increasing rates) just to keep hold of the same 1000 SQ ft place.

            • Neato@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Mortgage payments build equity and when you move you can sell the property and recoup nearly all of that. Rent is gone.

              Foreclosure is a huge issue that needs to be addressed in legislation. All that equity should still exist for the homeowner even if they stop being able to afford payments.

    • Star@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      We could use the existing empty housing for all of the homeless. No new “investments” are needed at all.

      Can people not see a project for its goals and not its costs? Money is hindering progress so badly.