Just Be Rich - Hackdot

Re:Just Be Rich by stdbrouw on Tuesday April 13, 2021 @05:35AM (#26790054)

Not an expert in macroeconomics either, but in a perfect free market there shouldn't be a lot of difference between renting and buying: if you can get a 5% yearly return by renting out a house, then the person renting from you can probably also get a 5% yearly return by investing their freed-up capital elsewhere and/or by not having to pay interest. If renting is too expensive, you buy, and if buying is too expensive, you rent. If one kind of investment like land or housing turns out to be particularly lucrative, capital will flow towards that type of investment and drive down returns towards the average again. Companies rent and lease stuff all the time, even if they have the money to buy, because often it just makes more sense. So there has to be something to disturb that happy picture and benefit owners at the expense of renters: a wonky tax structure, speculation, rate of return on land consistently higher than for other asset classes, cultural norms that value homeownership, who knows. Ownership of multiple dwellings by the wealthy might play a role, but in itself it's not a sufficient condition for high housing prices.

(It would be different if the wealthy were buying these houses to live in them or to leave them empty, as that would increase demand and constrain supply. Happening in London, Vancouver and a bunch of other places, I think. Also sort of like what happened with the quinoa fad: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quinoa#Effects_of_rising_deman...)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Just Be Rich by gjulianm on Tuesday April 13, 2021 @06:10AM (#26790277)

> If renting is too expensive, you buy, and if buying is too expensive, you rent.

Buying a house is not that easy. You need a bank to approve your mortgage, plus pay upfront money (plus pay for furniture and such) that people might not have because high rent prices stop them from saving money. More renters and less buyers might cause more wealthy people entering the market for speculation, compensating the decrease of people that want to buy to live. And on the other hand, given that housing is a necessity and not something that people can live without, landlords can still push prices up even with increased offer.

In general, I see a lot of takes on the housing market that focus too much on the theory and forgets the reality: people need houses, moving is not easy nor cheap, speculators and realtors can push prices up without that much pressure, and a lot of people don't have enough to face the expenses of buying a house.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Just Be Rich by stdbrouw on Tuesday April 13, 2021 @06:56AM (#26790555)

I agree, but my point was not that armchair economics is wonderful, what I tried to say was that it's often useful to find out precisely where theory and reality diverge and to focus solutions on those gaps, to avoid putting the blame on things that don't matter or suggesting regulation that won't work, like social housing (except as a short term solution), rent control or restrictions on who can buy.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Just Be Rich by wayoutthere on Tuesday April 13, 2021 @07:58AM (#26791007)

I would use a formula based on the tax-assessed value of a property to set a maximum rent. Landlords should be free to reappraise their properties as often as they like to be able to raise rents at the end of a lease, but doing so will increase the tax bill as well. Call it market-adjusted rent control if you like, but there needs to be a tight range between rent and value if we want to encourage more housing starts.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Just Be Rich by olejorgenb on Tuesday April 13, 2021 @06:24AM (#26790354)

> then the person renting from you can probably also get a 5% yearly return by investing their freed-up capital elsewhere and/or by not having to pay interest.

This might be true if one could get as cheap and deep leverage on alternative investments as a house mortgage.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Just Be Rich by eevilspock on Tuesday April 13, 2021 @06:19AM (#26790328)

You cannot have a "perfect free market" when huge swaths of the population are simply not anywhere near as free as the wealthy and privileged swaths. See the top comments for details.

Side note: It's heartening that the HN community has evolved in the last 10 years -- the current top comments wouldn't have been at the top 10 years ago, or even 5 years ago. While I think there is still a long way to go, it has come far from almost unbridled worship of PG, libertarianism and "meritocracy".

[ Parent | on HN ]