←back to thread

115 points harambae | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.195s | source
Show context
oldjim798 ◴[] No.46208294[source]
Ban corporate ownership of residences. Only individuals, Coops or condominiums. Cap how many rentals an individual can own.

The government should also build massive amounts of housing. Everywhere of all types - apartments, townhouses, single family. After built transferred to the residents as coops.

replies(4): >>46208350 #>>46208654 #>>46210359 #>>46210371 #
tptacek ◴[] No.46210371[source]
I love that there are people that can't even conceive of the idea that entities that let out apartments are providing a service to residents. In their view, the natural state of every resident is a desire to own their home.

A fun knock-on effect of this policy proposal: it would effectively halt all new development of dense multifamily.

replies(1): >>46210569 #
oldjim798 ◴[] No.46210569[source]
Yes, the natural state of every resident is to live in their own home. To be clear by home I don't mean "single family detached house on a suburban street", I mean a place to live with water, electricity, and a roof.

Landlords provide no 'service'; they are merely an existence tax.

The market already does not build dense multifamily; what is there to halt?

replies(4): >>46210603 #>>46210718 #>>46210796 #>>46211309 #
BeetleB ◴[] No.46210796[source]
> The market already does not build dense multifamily; what is there to halt?

Landlords have existed since forever, and the market was until recently very happy to build enough supply.

That it's suddenly gone downhill implies a problem well beyond "landlords".

replies(1): >>46210859 #
1. tptacek ◴[] No.46210859[source]
There's also the obvious fact that we do build dense multifamily (not enough of it, but some is better than "none", which is the endpoint of that policy).