• 0 Posts
  • 466 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 4th, 2023

help-circle













  • It’s not just landlords pushing it up.

    The constrained supply, the low interest rates, the greedy banks pushing bigger and bigger mortgages, government “help to buy” schemes which appear to be a way to help people buy homes, but in effect just pushes the price ever higher…

    The centralisation of jobs in certain areas. We have the internet. This could have practically solved the property crisis on it’s own, along with overloaded transport systems and pollution, but rich people were losing too much money, so back to the office, plebs.


  • Blackmist@feddit.uktopics@lemmy.worldGraffiti seen in Barcelona, Catalonia
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    If house prices were directly connected to inflation, there would be no issue.

    But they run far above inflation. This is what gets a pack of landlords involved.

    There’s a point where putting your money into a basic stock market tracker gives a better return than landlording. That’s when they go and do that instead. It’s a lot less up front investment, and a lot less risk.

    It’s mostly the spiralling house prices that attracts the landlord class, not the rent. The house is making money even if there’s nobody in it. Rent is just the icing on the cake. Right now they just cannot lose.


  • Blackmist@feddit.uktopics@lemmy.worldGraffiti seen in Barcelona, Catalonia
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    You have to realise that landlords aren’t the plague. They’re the buboes. A symptom.

    If you can take your spare money (a concept from days gone by, I know), buy a house for X, rent it out for Y a month, then finally sell it in 20 years for Z, and be 99.99% guaranteed to make more money from it than you can from pretty much any other source, then why wouldn’t you?

    Remove the incentive for that (homes that don’t go up by more than the inflation rate), there will be no need for them to exist.

    But in any case, the size of the building projects required would likely be government level anyway, and they can be the “landlord” for anyone not wanting to buy. This was called council houses in the olden days, before Maggie Thatcher killed that.



  • Blackmist@feddit.uktopics@lemmy.worldGraffiti seen in Barcelona, Catalonia
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    Build. More. Homes.

    We used to have enough, and then in the late 70s, early 80s they decided that if they didn’t build enough, then they could make housing scarce and therefore more valuable. A big long-con, 40 years in the making.

    Housebuilders would make more profit per home. Homeowners would have more wealth (even if they can’t access it). Inheritance taxes could take more of a bite. Landlords could charge more. Retirements could be funded entirely by buying 2-3 houses and renting them out, and then cash in later on the full value of those homes when they’d gone up by double the interest rates.

    They don’t have to be amazing homes. They don’t need an acre of land to sit on. They don’t need three bedrooms. Kitchen, bedroom, bathroom, living room. Affordable on a quarter of a single person’s minimum wage income.