this post was submitted on 09 Jun 2024
856 points (98.6% liked)

News

23014 readers
131 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Paywall removed: https://archive.is/MbQYG

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 months ago (4 children)

This is first order thinking. What this would cause is much much less building of units that people would rent, so the total supply would slow way down and housing would get worse.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago (2 children)

New units can still charge whatever they want.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

Thank you! What a year it's been.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (3 children)

But they still would not be able to keep up with inflation, and this would just be one more stone on a heap of other regulations that make it not worth building housing.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Might be depend on your area but around me we've had a cap for a few yesrs and units are still going up (not necessarily affordable ones).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Sure there will be some building, but it will be greatly decreased to what it would. If anything the builders will just do spec homes or move out of the market. I actually moved from a state with a cap (Oregon), and most of the landlords (including myself) just sold off any residential real estate.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

As a landlord, you might be a little biased?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

I am no longer a owner of residential real estate, I do only commercial at this point. I am just telling you the impacts of the laws they make.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

Wouldn't they just calculate the net present value of the average rental? Most people don't rent at one place for long, and everybody dies eventually.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

Maybe the landlords would be willing to rent all the unused housing then.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago

Wouldn't lower land prices mean higher ROIC and lower risk for developers (individual or corporate) ? And this hence lead to more housing?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Get rid of renting entirely and watch the quality of communities improve overnight.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Who would have built it for them and how would they have been paid?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I think they're referring to already-existing communities.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It still the same problem, where would they get the resources to get ownership of that real estate?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Depending on how exactly we're "getting rid of renting", I don't think they would be purchasing the building at today's prices. The landlord is SoL... at best. ;-)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

If that is how it is then the tenents would be doing good because the have stolen goods, but in the long run the problem would pop right back up and housing would be much more scarse.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Unfortunately, I think you're right. What is the solution to outrageous rent that doesn't involve the government providing more rent subsidies that simply funnel public money into the hands of property owners? That solution encourages property owners to raise rent because the government will increase subsidies to cover the difference.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The problem is the government makes it too hard and expensive to build anything. People dont realize this but on average the government adds over $100k per single family house that is built. As a person that is in housing, my number one issue is with the government, and they only make it worse. So the solution is to greatly reduce the amount the government is involved in the creation of new housing.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You mean like safety regulations? I hear this same shit from sales all the time complaining about factory of safety in design. “I told the customer it would only be $X, and now it’s so much more!”

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

I'm genuinely interested in how government involvement increases the cost. I honestly don't know. Like, is it dealing with zoning and permitting? I hope my good-faith intent is coming through here, I'm not just trying to bait an argument.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

Sure, if you are actually interested I can give you some basic examples. Lets take a look at some of the site details for a new build. Need to remove X yards of dirt - may require an engineer report. Ever see 100 yards of sidewalk/curb/gutter in the middle of no where - city requriement that will add $15k just for the concrete, let alone what you would need for retaining walls if there is a slope. If there is a mild slope to the lot - may need a different engineering report. Big developement - they will require land set aside that cant be developed for a wide varieties of things.