8 ms·
Housing can be affordable or an investment. It can't be both
by d6e 1y ago
Housing can be affordable or an investment. It can't be both
- irjustin 1y agoAt a system level - in Singapore it is. HDB (public) for affordable, private for everything else. 75+% of housing is part of the HDB system.
- xdfgh1112 1y agoHas no real democracy and the govt is able to plan decades ahead. It seems much better than the typical Western political system to me. But then again gays were only very recently accepted there, right?
- skinnymuch 1y agoThe west doesn’t have real democracy either. For the gay stuff, like the west?
- bmacho 1y agoIn 2001 Texas court prosecuted Lawrence for having gay sex in his home (supreme court decided against it 2 years later).
- irjustin 1y ago> Has no real democracy and the govt is able to plan decades ahead. I get the sentiment but accuracy is important here. It's a real democracy vs counties where voting is a sham. But yes, it is widely managed by a single party that was setup by a benevolent dictatorship and the current administration generally does a good job and is voted in with strong support. So agreed, they can do really interesting things because of their time horizons of control combined with willingness to work for the better of the people.
- conception 1y agoThis should be an easy choice and yet…
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- nenenejej 1y agoIt can be sort of both. What you need is more housing built at affordable prices. But dont oberbuild. In that situation housing should act as store of value to avoid inflation loss, but not something that you get rich buy borrowing and buying up dozens. You need socialism to do this efficiently. There isn't room for a profiteer. You need the government to invest (in the for people sense) in allocating land and building housing. Ideally dense housing.
- tpxl 1y ago> housing should act as store of value Why? Housing should act as a means to live decently. If my house depreciated to 0 once I'd built it, I wouldn't mind at all. > You need socialism to do this efficiently No you don't, you need to heavily tax empty and secondary residences and the issue solves itself in capitalism just fine.
- paulryanrogers 1y ago> heavily tax ... in capitalism Many of us are taught that heavy taxation is socialism, or at least incompatible with capitalism.
- kiba 1y agoHoarding land and land speculation is really the root problem. It's not bad for society if it was used to make building to provide rentable space to industries and business or to provide homes, or quite often both, but it doesn't provide easy money to investors. Now sitting on land and seeing it appreciate with no hard work from you? That's easy money.
- cornholio 1y agoThe key words here are "a basic" level of housing. A house in the most exclusive area of town will always be an investment (not necessarily a good one), because it primarily offers exclusion of other poorer members of the society from your surroundings, not habitation for yourself. It can't be affordable by definition. But a basic level of housing is a human right, because it's a prerequisite for maintaining your humanity, ditto for healthcare.
- Thorrez 1y agoIt's also possible for housing to be neither affordable nor an investment. If there's an expensive area of town, and property tax is 100%, that would be expensive and I don't think people would consider it an investment.
- nkmnz 1y agoCounterhypothesis: housing that's not affordable is a bad investment.