Political Memes

its called a nature reserve because its a piece of nature thats reserved to be used as a golf course in the future

It's like you're not even considering the feelings of the millionaires and billionaires with 72 houses each and I for one just won't stand for it.

That on top of a tax that is highly progressive after x number of properties, regardless of occupancies.

I hope that you're right, because in 20 years that will no longer be true, and maybe we'll be able to make real progress on housing at that point.

I'm all for it of they include vacant land.. I wouldn't mind having acreage, and getting one of them unfinished Amazon houses.

Of the four ideas that are listed on this picture that's the one you gonna go with for being the worst?

This is just to first time home buyers, not to anyone buying a house

It's more pointless than bad, I would think.

Don't know that it would be sufficient, but it's not free money to all property owners, just those that haven't yet been able to get to home ownership, but have been renting consistently for a couple of years.

So if in a normal market, a new homebuyer has a budget that's about $15k less than some speculative asshat looking for an investment rather than a home, then this tips the scales in favor of that would-be new homebuyer.

There needs to be some sort of tipping the scale in favor of people seeking to own their own primary residence versus those that already have their primary residence and ideally disincentivize those looking to acquire property they have no interest in using themselves.

If you have one side that is pushing into the crazy territory really hard, the public discourse will change and shift in a way, that a moderate position will be perceived as extreme. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

dont allow corporations and billionaires to buy thousands of flats

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.

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).

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

It’s assistance not giving. I think it’s just a fund you can borrow from to get enough to start a mortgage.

It would also only apply to people who can’t afford the mortgage.

So it’s not going to impact house prices in the sense you say it would. Except slightly increasing demand to buy and thereby decreasing demand to rent.

Honestly I really don't think that's effective either. Giving people more money to buy something generally just means the market will respond by charging more money for that thing. The assistance will effectively get "priced in" given time.

It's honestly the weakest part of the Harris/Walz platform for me. Trump plan is utterly insane top-to-bottom though, and they're just using immigration as a scapegoat here, which is... something.