We posted a poll on a website displaying high home prices showing how high home prices have become. Do these prices that you are currently concerned about affect your current concerns? Probably.
Local town FB page has them raging about the new apartment complexes being built "The traffic is going to be so bad!"
Yes boomers, you're right... The extra 150 people moving in to these new apartments is going to cripple traffic on roads that see on average 25,000 vehicles a day... /s
This is so relatable. This debate is happening right now in my town of 8000 because a new 100 unit apartment complex has been proposed in the city center. Somehow it will make parking in the "historic downtown" area impossible and the traffic will become unbearable if we increase the population of the area by 2-3%.
Absolutely. The new apartments would be within three blocks of a coffee shop, brewery, 4 restaurants, and a handful of other miscellaneous shops. If I wasn't already a homeowner with two kids I'd have loved to have all that within walking distance.
Right? Cars are clearly a problem so let’s get rid of them and get a robust trolley system in place with walkable city designs being prioritized.
Are cars an issue or not?
I mean… not that I agree with them at all. They need to take away lanes and use them for transit and bikes, fuck cars. But traffic is nonlinear. Something like 10% more cars can double travel times when you’re at capacity. Build one more lane bro and all it does is induce demand.
You couldn’t come up with a worse possible way of moving around a city than cars.
Literally my county.
They all cashed out on generational land, ran off with millions, pushed for a vibrant downtown/city that has attractions, businesses, medical facilities… and now that the “traffic is bad” they’re trying to slam the door on all new development using the same tired lines we make fun of on here.
“We don’t want urban creep, we want the area to remain rural”. Meanwhile I’m mere minutes from “downtown” but if I need a hospital it’s a 45+ minute drive… and ambulances are so strained some people have had better luck driving themselves.
Shows you how detached the political people have become.
Zero talk on affordable housing among 2 old ass people.
Hot button issue and absolutely no one talking about it with more people living on the streets.
at least most young people are in agreement that we're watching the end of the country, that's something i guess lol [https://www.semafor.com/article/05/28/2024/a-dying-empire-led-by-bad-people-poll-finds-young-voters-despairing-over-us-politics](https://www.semafor.com/article/05/28/2024/a-dying-empire-led-by-bad-people-poll-finds-young-voters-despairing-over-us-politics)
You only vote on culture war issues if you refuse to dig into policies and actual actions taken to by both administrations. There are very public press releases, all of the time, by the White House.
Name something that's important to you. I'll look it up for you and report it for you.
True. They just want to pretend things they want aren’t being done, because it’s easier to accept nothing being reported meaning nothing is being done.
Nobody with any chance of winning any election, anywhere is running on that platform. You might as well have picked Reverse Colonialism of the US as a policy, where everyone has to take a DNA test and then every single person who is majority something other than indigenous, must move back to where the largest portion of their DNA says their ancestors are from.
I do believe in degrowth, unfortunately, not enough people do and putting that forward, especially in the end stage capitalism world we live in today, is extremely unrealistic.
We'd have a better chance at turning utilities into public utilities, including compensating shareholders for the loss of control.
You wanna hit me with something that's remotely realistic in today's political climate?
To be fair, it's political suicide. Majority of voters are homeowners AND homeowners are more likely to vote. Fixing the affordability issue would directly impact their net worth. Forget appealing to your base, you would simultaneously piss off everyone regardless of which party you belong to.
And that's before you start digging into lobbyists and donors. Ultimately, it ain't happening.
This is the sad, unfortunate truth. The reality is that those who came before us don’t want to see us succeed or do well like they did. It cuts into their bottom line.
Love having this argument with people. The issue is we need to stop treating homes as if they were a stock / investment.
Homes, should be treated as a way to foster happy healthy communities and nothing else.
Not only that, but we should encourage people to own the homes that they live in.
Period. Do those two things, and watch everything fall into place.
But we wont, because NIMBY's / greed.
There was a 20-30 year window where private pensions were going away and people didn’t have a nest egg for retirement other than equity in a house. With the continued utilization of relatively recent retirement accounts, hopefully the mindset of the house being an investment will slowly wither away.
The fact that 2/3 Americans own a home is mindblowing to me. Out of everyone I know I can think of 2 people that own a home (and they both had help from family)
There is such thing as social circle bias. If you’re a renter you probably live in a rental heavy area and associate with similar renters. This is exacerbated by age and social economic class (doctors would know more doctors and fast food workers associate with other fast food workers etc). Plenty of home owners would be like “I only know 2 people who rent”.
2/3 is the national average. In California, for example, only 45% own a home. Either way, a large amount of citizens are home owners and chopping down their equity to help lower prices for more people to own a home is a good way to get voted out.
I’m in my mid 30’s, I know significantly more homeowners than non homeowners. Most of them bought back when they were in the 100-150k range for a basic house. The most recent one bought 4 years ago, I don’t know anyone who bought since then, we got hit hard by Covid/WFH transplants since it’s beautiful here and an absolute bargain, even today if you’re not stuck making local wages.
I bought vacant land a couple years ago and feel like I hit the jackpot with it. I’ll build on it eventually, just not in any hurry since I have a dirt cheap rental room with a buddy who owns his home.
So basically agreeing as painful as it is.
Welp.. there will be a reasonable opportunity to own as long as the FED doesn’t try to save real estate.
I am an appraiser and these cycles happen because of FED policy.
The next FED policy will be to uphold current prices through a rate cut but it will backfire and release pent up demand for sellers.
People are litterally locked in from downsizing because it would cost more to rent than their current mortgage.
Shit makes no sense right now
What FED Policy pushed equity firms to buy up large tracts of homes to sit on them and do nothing with them or buy large tracts of homes and then rent them for exorbitant rates?
How about the Federal policies that led to the collapse.
This is just one part of many errors that led to a blow up and collapse.
https://www.aei.org/articles/a-crisis-caused-by-housing-policies-not-lack-of-regulation/
If you stand back and look at all the errors it’s a bit overwhelming.
What is a smaller home to you? The problem is a lot of the home building costs have a heavy base cost and don't increase linearly with size. Want to do a 1 level with a basement? Lot costs the same, developing the plot with power and sewage costs the same. Building a two story vs a 1 story with a basement is the same foundation cost.
It's just not cost efficient to build small houses. Over by me they built some smaller homes (2-2.5k sqft) when interest rates spiked but for 30% more money you could get 50-60% more sqft.
As long as people keep buying the bigger homes that's what will be built.
Also I started in a townhouse, a lot of people I know started in a townhouse. They are building a metric ton of them where I am. That seems like a really good starter home middle ground.
They are making only luxury condos and apartments around me which are as much as single family homes. That's it. $400,000+. 1-2BR. No townhomes. And that's on the lower end.
And I don't think current home owners know what that means.
That is $3500/month for all typical fees + HOA making that up to $4500/month at 7% interest.
For the $250k at 3% that's like $1750-2250/month.
Basically double.
And this is the bottom end.
Do you make enough at your job to have $4000-5000/month for a 1-2br apartment sitting around?
Or, more likely $5000+/month.
To go to actual affordability, like 3 years ago, you need to literally be looking into trailer parks or places that are essentially condemned. Or, going outside is gang wars.
That's the reality of today.
Yeah it would have to be a WAY smaller/crappier home, to go from a 3% mortgage to a 7% one.
I don't necessarily blame builders for building larger homes instead of smaller ones -- they have a financial incentive to build larger, and overhead/lot costs are such that they can't crank out $200k homes anymore in areas people want to live in.
That didn't stop the federal government from standardizing education and highways. Come up with a national zoning standard and reward localities that follow it.
I as a homeowner don’t classify my home as part of my net worth. I’m ready to get into a bigger house but everything is crazy expensive right now. I look forward to all housing being cheaper because that means I get to buy a bigger house for less money. My ~100k fake equity be damned.
Agreed, my equity "gains" aren't real unless I sell, and I'm not gonna sell right now because I can't afford anything equivalent to my current place, let alone better, even with those "gains".
You can get around the issue with 100% price controlled new housing that is kept outside of the market that is heavily subsidized or funded (or even built direct) by the government. Make it only first time home buyers, impossible to rent, impossible to sell to anyone but another first time home buyer and not able to be profited from. Unable to be bought by any foreign entity, person or corporation anywhere. Obviously demand modest income levels with demands for upkeep so they don't turn into slums.
**These people can't buy their properties, anyway.**
That would only slightly impact homeowners already overvalued wealth. Which is partially overvalued because people can't afford it. But they can sell to corporations and foreign investors still, so it'll keep on going up, as it is.
But now, everyone would rather destroy the next generations.
Boomers beautiful legacy.
Get everything, sacrifice nothing, burn it all behind you.
We’re heading into neo-feudalism where everyone with land is fully dependent on their liege lord. Or we would be, if the collapsing biosphere wasn’t going to kill most of us in the near future.
Biden has announced a plan to address housing prices.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/03/07/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-plan-to-lower-housing-costs-for-working-families/
Trump has also, kind of, proposed a plan for housing prices:
"We'll get the prices way down and then the interest rates down and then the home builders will start building again, because nobody can get money from the bank because the interest rate's high."
https://www.newsweek.com/how-donald-trump-plans-fix-housing-market-1811663
I mean, that’s not a plan, but maybe a mission statement? Who am I kidding, it’s bullshit.
Tbh, the real problem isn’t that the candidates haven’t talked about housing. It’s that housing is legitimately an intractable issue on a short time scale.
And furthermore, the thing voters don’t like is the bitter medicine that would make housing prices cheaper eventually.
I got reamed in another sub for saying perhaps two men in their late 70s / early 80s showing signs of mental decline shouldn't be running for the most powerful and stressful job on earth.
Other countries are laughing that these two are the best each party can muster.
There's actually been a fair amount of talk from both sides. The Biden camp has at least acknowledged the problem, but is only offering minor band-aid fixes (aside from the realpage crackdown).
Then there's the Trump camp, who say things like "they're coming for your property values", and are looking to cut the HUD budget and favor tightening zoning laws even more. Trump himself is a landlord, don't forget.
They're talking, you're just not listening.
> Shows you how detached the political people have become.
A third of Gen Z is under 18. A third of Gen Z hasn’t graduated college yet
The disconnect here is that the article claims people as young as 12 years old are voting based on housing
Show up to your city council meetings and force the issue nimbys and landlords win because they show up locally and people who want affordable housing don't.
Trump is talking about deporting half of the labor force that builds new housing, so he IS talking about it. He's just not talking about the consequences of his insane platform.
His entire campaign is pro inflationary policy and housing will be one of the hardest hit. Can't build if you have no builders.
The President is proposing that each Federal Home Loan Bank double its annual contribution to the Affordable Housing Program – from 10 percent of prior year net income to 20 percent – which will raise an additional $3.79 billion for affordable housing over the next decade and assist nearly 380,000 households.Mar 7, 2024
If you want a candidate that is going to do something for housing, vote for Joe Biden.
At the risk of getting too political, this is kind of hilarious.
During the past 3.5 years, Joe Biden's immigration policies have resulted in 7.2 MILLION people crossing the Southern border.
Providing assistance for 380,000 households over the course of a decade doesn't even begin to address the damage he's done, let only address the problem.
To be fair, most of the impediments to housing happen at the local level. And there *is* a lot of attention paid to housing in local politics, for people who choose to get involved there.
Actually Biden has been talking about this.
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/08/president-biden-floats-10000-first-time-homebuyers-tax-credit.html
https://www.hud.gov/press/press_releases_media_advisories/hud_no_24_103
https://www.forbes.com/sites/darylfairweather/2024/03/11/unfreezing-housing-what-bidens-plan-would-mean-for-affordability/
Nah, shows you MORE about how detached the media is, in relation to reporting on the candidates or maybe you just don't look at news sources that do?
Biden has made comments on housing affordability and 3 months ago started working on plans and policies to help correct some market issues with affordable housing.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/03/07/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-plan-to-lower-housing-costs-for-working-families/#:\~:text=The%20President%20is%20proposing%20that,and%20assist%20nearly%20380%2C000%20households.
Pick another thing you don't think Biden is talking about. I'll google it for you and report on it for you.
ngl... What exactly should the Fed do here?
Tax cuts for new builders? They're already cutting every corner to increase profits, that's going right back into the builder's pocket...
Tax rebates for first home buyers again? Would be nice to see but it's not going to be enough to offset a new home purchase.
What we need is higher minimum wage - and I'm not talking $15. That was a talking point with Obama... in 2008. It's been fucking 16 years since then... With no change. The minimum wage should be much closer to 22 an hour for most in the US.
Hey, question: When you guys say "the Fed" do you mean the Federal Reserve, or the Federal Govt? I'm finding this convo hard to follow because I think people are using it interchangeably.
What are you talking about? One of them clearly has a plan to tackle housing affordability by deporting all the brown people.
Think about how many homes will be free!
If the youth voted in higher percentages, the politicians would give more shits about what the youth want. Until that day, be prepared for more government for old people by old people.
It doesn't matter. Theres only 2 parties to vote for and both have kept interest rates too low and caused the housing bubble to keep inflating since 2008 and both of the current choices have shown they don't want to raise rates enough to combat the housing bubble problem let alone inflation. I honestly think too many people have grown up in the bailout system and actually believe rates should go back to 0% so the immediate costs of lower rates seem lower and don't understand that the higher asking price bubble is 100% driven by those too-low rates in the first place.
Yeah that's what I'm wondering, because... neither candidate even has a platform. One is licking the wall paper and the other is talking about sharks attacks relentlessly. Ah, the joys of aging.
Biden has a comprehensive affordable housing plan. IDK if it's any good, or how plausible the polices are, but it's there:
[FACT SHEET: President Biden Announces Plan to Lower Housing Costs for Working Families | The White House](https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/03/07/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-plan-to-lower-housing-costs-for-working-families/)
[FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Announces New Actions to Boost Housing Supply and Lower Housing Costs | The White House](https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/02/29/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-new-actions-to-boost-housing-supply-and-lower-housing-costs/)
etc.
I think the federal govt can do some things, but there are limits to what it can accomplish given local autonomy on housing issues.
I think this is an issue a lot of us would vote for if there was a meaningful way of fixing it. Offering First time home buyer incentives is a bandaid and will just inflate prices long-term.
Banning corporations/foreign investors would hurt development in developing areas of the country, but could be beneficial overall. It would however have unintended consequences on rental/vacation homes. I feel like there is no cure-all for this problem, with the only real answer being a wealth transfer from the older generations to the younger ones.
It's really not that hard.
Be lenient with new builds to allow developers to make a profit, and tax to death investors with existing/old builds to drive the prices down. Operate rentals through housing coops instead of for-profit landlords. LVT is a good method for removing profits from land (see Georgism), and the taxes can be used to buy up properties from landlords as they exit the market (and rent out through coops). As land values are driven down, the cost of new builds becomes cheaper. Win win (without the freeloaders)
66% of Americans own their home. They aren't going to support drastic changes that makes housing affordable because that would directly hurt them.
Older people and wealthier people own homes. And while it's 66% overall... It's much worse when you look at who votes.
> 59% of eligible homeowners voted compared to 40% for renters
So if you have 1000 people in a fictional town, 6600 own and 3400 rent. Then you have an election and 3,894 homeowners vote and 1,360 renters vote.
Politicians pay lip service to affordable housing but they rarely do anything real to help.
First time homebuyer credits just inflate prices. It helps first time home buyers at the expense of other buyers and it benefits sellers.
Now take a look at what proportion of the population are home owners based on the growth projections that home investors are using..
High house prices are also bad for owner occupiers that just want to live in their house, and want their children to be able to buy as well. You can easily get a majority of renters and owners that prefer lower prices, not too far in the future. And it is by far the #1 issue for many people, and a growing proportion of the population
Waiving setback and housing type zoning rules alleviates a lot of this. If a bigger house can be built, or even better a duet house, it often works out better for whomever is improving the lot
Also people forget population. If you want land prices to stay more stable, then maintain a stable population growth rate by having a better handle on immigration rates.
Yeah, that's what I'm seeing here in Europe. House prices stay elevated because buyers are buying with inheritances. Housing has become a generational issue, with only those with good financial relations will be able to buy. Tough luck if your parents / grandparents are heavy spenders though.
Especially for the latter a change of policy should be welcome. How, I don't know.
That's not happening as it's going to get drained by end of life and long term care, and for the rest, the boomers have 3-4 kids, they're not going to get much at all.
It will EVAPORATE not be transferred.
The policies aren't written for people where "only" a few million in elderly care will wipe them out. The rich are entirely detached from such concerns.
Ban any form of investment housing. Basic needs do not need to be commodities let alone fucking landbanks.
Edit: there is a difference between using new builds as an investment and commoditization of existing structures. The first one is fine, the latter needs a straight up ban. Once the first person has moved it in it should officially be dwelling or purpose (shops, restaurants etc.) only.
I missed the boat. At housing prices at 80% higher than two years ago, it's either the ghetto or a double wide or living in bumfuck Iowa for me. And I earn a decent living.
$5000/month for what was $1500 a month 10 years ago?
And they blame the youth and avocado toast for this?
Unfortunately I don't think either candidate is going to fix the housing market. We should limit corporate home ownership and keep interest rates high until the market comes down
Capitalism didn't create the 30-year mortgage, FHA financing for investment properties, single family zoning, parking minimums, all this shit.
When housing was part of the capitalist system we didn't have these problems.
Governing via executive order is bad and anti-democratic. It should be avoided whenever possible. The Bully Pulpit literally doesn’t work so pressuring Congress will have minimal effect. There’s tons of political science research on this.
But you’re still wrong, because Biden does talk about home affordability; he even has a whole plan about it! Here it is: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/03/07/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-plan-to-lower-housing-costs-for-working-families/
The fact remains that the president doesn’t control markets, even with EOs, because of capitalism: we don’t have a centrally planned economy. This is a long running, complex issue with lots of causes, most of which are at the zoning and local market issue. Whining for Biden to fix it for you just reveals you don’t understand the issue or our system of government.
Show up to your city council meetings and ask for this then housing is expensive because landlords and nimbys show up and people who care about affordability don't
So they aren’t voting for anyone? No major political party, or politician running, has any plan to deal with housing in any way that would make a difference.
It seems very unlikely this will result in votes for state and local reps that will actually remove barriers to increasing housing supply.
Instead this will be, “housing got way more expensive under Biden so I’ll vote for Trump” without realizing that most of his net worth is tied up in the value of real estate.
Not just Gen Z. Half of millenials don't own homes either. Housing absolutely should be the number one discussion (along with inflation in general). Assholes who are telling you the economy is doing better than ever are lying through their teeth.
WTF? The PRESIDENT sets the price of housing in Texarkana and Ann Arbor??? Insane. There is not a more local issue than housing. Look at local zoning, local public transportation networks, local jobs programs for construction trades... These impact housing.
The president could in a VERY indirect way provide leadership and carrot/sticks to help a little, but jeesh, is there one president candidate that just MIGHT want to see real estate developers make out like bandits??
they're a little young to jump into the game, but considering most of their options for housing are overpriced "luxury" shitbox pods on top of breweries, i don't blame them
The oldest are 27, the youngest 12.
Even of the people who can vote, they don’t until their mid 20s or older.
Gen Z isn’t going to have a meaningful impact on much. Look to Millenials.
great. to reiterate what i said, some of the earliest ranges have them at 1995. here's sources where that date is used included news sources and researchers: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation\_Z#cite\_note-98](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_Z#cite_note-98)
pick which ever one makes you feel youngest i guess.
Housing affordability isn't just SFH. They're old enough to be in the game of paying for housing. Unfortunately most young adults can't afford to live anywhere except their parents basement.
Mass illegal immigration will only increase population and demand for housing over the next 20-30 years.
I'm fortunate my kid has a nice inheritance waiting for her.
You can do it by not crossing boomers by doing new builds with controlled pricing for first time home buyers that can only be sold to other first time home buyers with no profit and not to anyone with a trust fund or inherited wealth. Make a 2nd market that is not part of the main market. But this is thinking WAY out of the box.
Whoa. Wait. You mean a real estate survey revealed real estate is the most important thing?
I also hear 3M just did a survey and it revealed sticky notes are the best paper for wedding invitations and eviction notices.
So then they are actively interested in getting millions of undocumented immigrants back to their countries? Those people have to live somewhere. Gen Z and younger Millennials are paying the price.
Not true: https://nikemawilliams.house.gov/posts/congresswoman-nikema-williams-introduces-bicameral-legislation-to-ban-hedge-fund-ownership-of-residential-housing#
Current Administration has proposals to help this. Unfortunately, not enough people pay attention to actually news to know this.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/darylfairweather/2024/03/11/unfreezing-housing-what-bidens-plan-would-mean-for-affordability/
https://www.hud.gov/press/press_releases_media_advisories/hud_no_24_103
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/08/president-biden-floats-10000-first-time-homebuyers-tax-credit.html
Housing is mostly impacted by local government in terms of zoning and permit process etc. Beyond that it comes down to cost to build in the local market.
No shit, housing is something we all interact with in an intimate way and spend piles of our hard earned money on. Young people and working class people got screwed the hardest by inflation and the housing bubble. Unfortunately neither candidate can be trusted on this issue. All policies from both political sides seem to be in favor of inflation and asset bubbles. No surprise since that's what benefits old and wealthy people the most.
According to a Redfin survey? Where was Redfin surveying these people? On the Redfin website? I’m not saying the results are wrong, but consider the source.
I want to share this tweet but I don't see it? Can you share the original Twitter link please?
The 7:47 AM tweet was about US Government debt: [https://twitter.com/unusual\_whales/status/1803801730347635122](https://twitter.com/unusual_whales/status/1803801730347635122)
The real estate lobby is huge in DC. Almost the same size/sway as Big oil, pharma. No way are they going to allow anything through that doesn't line their pockets. They are, after all, the main reason housing is so expensive.
Easy -- Shut down having more than 2 properties. Shut down AirBnB. Shut down foreign investment with HB5 visas. Make it so you have to live in your primary home at least 6 months out of the year. Other countries are already doing most... catch up America.
what a surpise that a survey held by a realty company says people are concerned about houses. I don't disagree, but the data point is weak.
We posted a poll on a website displaying high home prices showing how high home prices have become. Do these prices that you are currently concerned about affect your current concerns? Probably.
"But what if more people park on the street?" -Boomers
Won’t someone think of the ~~children~~ cars!
Local town FB page has them raging about the new apartment complexes being built "The traffic is going to be so bad!" Yes boomers, you're right... The extra 150 people moving in to these new apartments is going to cripple traffic on roads that see on average 25,000 vehicles a day... /s
This is so relatable. This debate is happening right now in my town of 8000 because a new 100 unit apartment complex has been proposed in the city center. Somehow it will make parking in the "historic downtown" area impossible and the traffic will become unbearable if we increase the population of the area by 2-3%.
Imagine if 2-3% of people didn’t have to drive and park in the historic district because…they live there and can walk.
Absolutely. The new apartments would be within three blocks of a coffee shop, brewery, 4 restaurants, and a handful of other miscellaneous shops. If I wasn't already a homeowner with two kids I'd have loved to have all that within walking distance.
[удалено]
Right? Cars are clearly a problem so let’s get rid of them and get a robust trolley system in place with walkable city designs being prioritized. Are cars an issue or not?
Cars are only an issue when *those people* are driving them.
I mean… not that I agree with them at all. They need to take away lanes and use them for transit and bikes, fuck cars. But traffic is nonlinear. Something like 10% more cars can double travel times when you’re at capacity. Build one more lane bro and all it does is induce demand. You couldn’t come up with a worse possible way of moving around a city than cars.
boomers shouldn't have had so many kids
For real. So many of them didn't even really want kids anyway.
Stop opposing bike infrastructure and people won't have to.
Literally my county. They all cashed out on generational land, ran off with millions, pushed for a vibrant downtown/city that has attractions, businesses, medical facilities… and now that the “traffic is bad” they’re trying to slam the door on all new development using the same tired lines we make fun of on here. “We don’t want urban creep, we want the area to remain rural”. Meanwhile I’m mere minutes from “downtown” but if I need a hospital it’s a 45+ minute drive… and ambulances are so strained some people have had better luck driving themselves.
Shows you how detached the political people have become. Zero talk on affordable housing among 2 old ass people. Hot button issue and absolutely no one talking about it with more people living on the streets.
We're expected to vote based on culture war issues alone, nothing having to do with improving material conditions is on the table.
Yep, while they are solidifying power and control with a divided voting base. Painful to watch the end of a country from the inside.
A Great civilizations is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within.
Couldn’t have said it better myself. I love America as an immigrant here and I’m super sad it’s deteriorating for certain sections of the population.
at least most young people are in agreement that we're watching the end of the country, that's something i guess lol [https://www.semafor.com/article/05/28/2024/a-dying-empire-led-by-bad-people-poll-finds-young-voters-despairing-over-us-politics](https://www.semafor.com/article/05/28/2024/a-dying-empire-led-by-bad-people-poll-finds-young-voters-despairing-over-us-politics)
You only vote on culture war issues if you refuse to dig into policies and actual actions taken to by both administrations. There are very public press releases, all of the time, by the White House. Name something that's important to you. I'll look it up for you and report it for you.
You wont get a reply as no one really wants an answer.
True. They just want to pretend things they want aren’t being done, because it’s easier to accept nothing being reported meaning nothing is being done.
[удалено]
Nobody with any chance of winning any election, anywhere is running on that platform. You might as well have picked Reverse Colonialism of the US as a policy, where everyone has to take a DNA test and then every single person who is majority something other than indigenous, must move back to where the largest portion of their DNA says their ancestors are from. I do believe in degrowth, unfortunately, not enough people do and putting that forward, especially in the end stage capitalism world we live in today, is extremely unrealistic. We'd have a better chance at turning utilities into public utilities, including compensating shareholders for the loss of control. You wanna hit me with something that's remotely realistic in today's political climate?
Medicare for all
The growing wealth gap in the US.
[https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/03/07/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-plan-to-lower-housing-costs-for-working-families/](https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/03/07/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-plan-to-lower-housing-costs-for-working-families/)
To be fair, it's political suicide. Majority of voters are homeowners AND homeowners are more likely to vote. Fixing the affordability issue would directly impact their net worth. Forget appealing to your base, you would simultaneously piss off everyone regardless of which party you belong to. And that's before you start digging into lobbyists and donors. Ultimately, it ain't happening.
This is the sad, unfortunate truth. The reality is that those who came before us don’t want to see us succeed or do well like they did. It cuts into their bottom line.
Ladder pulled up right behind themselves
Love having this argument with people. The issue is we need to stop treating homes as if they were a stock / investment. Homes, should be treated as a way to foster happy healthy communities and nothing else. Not only that, but we should encourage people to own the homes that they live in. Period. Do those two things, and watch everything fall into place. But we wont, because NIMBY's / greed.
There was a 20-30 year window where private pensions were going away and people didn’t have a nest egg for retirement other than equity in a house. With the continued utilization of relatively recent retirement accounts, hopefully the mindset of the house being an investment will slowly wither away.
Unfortunately you are probably right 🫤
With 2/3 of Americans owning a home, I’d say they are definitely right
The fact that 2/3 Americans own a home is mindblowing to me. Out of everyone I know I can think of 2 people that own a home (and they both had help from family)
There is such thing as social circle bias. If you’re a renter you probably live in a rental heavy area and associate with similar renters. This is exacerbated by age and social economic class (doctors would know more doctors and fast food workers associate with other fast food workers etc). Plenty of home owners would be like “I only know 2 people who rent”.
2/3 is the national average. In California, for example, only 45% own a home. Either way, a large amount of citizens are home owners and chopping down their equity to help lower prices for more people to own a home is a good way to get voted out.
It helps if you live in an area where houses aren't very expensive lol Where I live most houses are 250-375. Pricy but doable for most.
I’m in my mid 30’s, I know significantly more homeowners than non homeowners. Most of them bought back when they were in the 100-150k range for a basic house. The most recent one bought 4 years ago, I don’t know anyone who bought since then, we got hit hard by Covid/WFH transplants since it’s beautiful here and an absolute bargain, even today if you’re not stuck making local wages. I bought vacant land a couple years ago and feel like I hit the jackpot with it. I’ll build on it eventually, just not in any hurry since I have a dirt cheap rental room with a buddy who owns his home.
Yeah I think that depends on were you live but also what you do or who you interact with.
So basically agreeing as painful as it is. Welp.. there will be a reasonable opportunity to own as long as the FED doesn’t try to save real estate. I am an appraiser and these cycles happen because of FED policy. The next FED policy will be to uphold current prices through a rate cut but it will backfire and release pent up demand for sellers. People are litterally locked in from downsizing because it would cost more to rent than their current mortgage. Shit makes no sense right now
What FED Policy pushed equity firms to buy up large tracts of homes to sit on them and do nothing with them or buy large tracts of homes and then rent them for exorbitant rates?
How about the Federal policies that led to the collapse. This is just one part of many errors that led to a blow up and collapse. https://www.aei.org/articles/a-crisis-caused-by-housing-policies-not-lack-of-regulation/ If you stand back and look at all the errors it’s a bit overwhelming.
There is no ability to downsize as they're no longer making smaller homes. Don't blame that on the FED.
What is a smaller home to you? The problem is a lot of the home building costs have a heavy base cost and don't increase linearly with size. Want to do a 1 level with a basement? Lot costs the same, developing the plot with power and sewage costs the same. Building a two story vs a 1 story with a basement is the same foundation cost. It's just not cost efficient to build small houses. Over by me they built some smaller homes (2-2.5k sqft) when interest rates spiked but for 30% more money you could get 50-60% more sqft. As long as people keep buying the bigger homes that's what will be built. Also I started in a townhouse, a lot of people I know started in a townhouse. They are building a metric ton of them where I am. That seems like a really good starter home middle ground.
They are making only luxury condos and apartments around me which are as much as single family homes. That's it. $400,000+. 1-2BR. No townhomes. And that's on the lower end. And I don't think current home owners know what that means. That is $3500/month for all typical fees + HOA making that up to $4500/month at 7% interest. For the $250k at 3% that's like $1750-2250/month. Basically double. And this is the bottom end. Do you make enough at your job to have $4000-5000/month for a 1-2br apartment sitting around? Or, more likely $5000+/month. To go to actual affordability, like 3 years ago, you need to literally be looking into trailer parks or places that are essentially condemned. Or, going outside is gang wars. That's the reality of today.
Another issue and you are correct.. The choices are a townhouse community in the middle of nowhere and McMansions. There is no longer s middle.
Yeah it would have to be a WAY smaller/crappier home, to go from a 3% mortgage to a 7% one. I don't necessarily blame builders for building larger homes instead of smaller ones -- they have a financial incentive to build larger, and overhead/lot costs are such that they can't crank out $200k homes anymore in areas people want to live in.
Also it’s something that is almost all based on state and local regs. There isn’t a ton that the federal Government can do.
The entire financial machinery of homeownership is nationalized.
Which directly increases demand side but not necessarily supply side. We need more supply to offset the demand.
And what happened the last time a President tried to manipulate the financial system to get people into homes?
That didn't stop the federal government from standardizing education and highways. Come up with a national zoning standard and reward localities that follow it.
I as a homeowner don’t classify my home as part of my net worth. I’m ready to get into a bigger house but everything is crazy expensive right now. I look forward to all housing being cheaper because that means I get to buy a bigger house for less money. My ~100k fake equity be damned.
Agreed, my equity "gains" aren't real unless I sell, and I'm not gonna sell right now because I can't afford anything equivalent to my current place, let alone better, even with those "gains".
Yep, who cares if my house is worth a million dollars when everything else is also at least a million dollars.
You can get around the issue with 100% price controlled new housing that is kept outside of the market that is heavily subsidized or funded (or even built direct) by the government. Make it only first time home buyers, impossible to rent, impossible to sell to anyone but another first time home buyer and not able to be profited from. Unable to be bought by any foreign entity, person or corporation anywhere. Obviously demand modest income levels with demands for upkeep so they don't turn into slums. **These people can't buy their properties, anyway.** That would only slightly impact homeowners already overvalued wealth. Which is partially overvalued because people can't afford it. But they can sell to corporations and foreign investors still, so it'll keep on going up, as it is. But now, everyone would rather destroy the next generations. Boomers beautiful legacy. Get everything, sacrifice nothing, burn it all behind you.
We’re heading into neo-feudalism where everyone with land is fully dependent on their liege lord. Or we would be, if the collapsing biosphere wasn’t going to kill most of us in the near future.
Housing policy is local, and at the state level at the highest.
Show up to your city council meetings
I did. We are trying to get a massive warehouse project blocked out here. We want housing instead. Inland empire, ca
Biden has announced a plan to address housing prices. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/03/07/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-plan-to-lower-housing-costs-for-working-families/ Trump has also, kind of, proposed a plan for housing prices: "We'll get the prices way down and then the interest rates down and then the home builders will start building again, because nobody can get money from the bank because the interest rate's high." https://www.newsweek.com/how-donald-trump-plans-fix-housing-market-1811663 I mean, that’s not a plan, but maybe a mission statement? Who am I kidding, it’s bullshit. Tbh, the real problem isn’t that the candidates haven’t talked about housing. It’s that housing is legitimately an intractable issue on a short time scale. And furthermore, the thing voters don’t like is the bitter medicine that would make housing prices cheaper eventually.
[удалено]
They are detached because they are all like a 100 years old. Congress is a glorified retirement home.
I got reamed in another sub for saying perhaps two men in their late 70s / early 80s showing signs of mental decline shouldn't be running for the most powerful and stressful job on earth. Other countries are laughing that these two are the best each party can muster.
Not sure why, that is an incredibly popular opinion , this is the rematch no one wanted
Anyone that lives in a home bought before 2003 is detached from this issue.
Before 2015. Lol.
There's actually been a fair amount of talk from both sides. The Biden camp has at least acknowledged the problem, but is only offering minor band-aid fixes (aside from the realpage crackdown). Then there's the Trump camp, who say things like "they're coming for your property values", and are looking to cut the HUD budget and favor tightening zoning laws even more. Trump himself is a landlord, don't forget. They're talking, you're just not listening.
Perhaps they are talking, not taking action and i stopped listening.
> Shows you how detached the political people have become. A third of Gen Z is under 18. A third of Gen Z hasn’t graduated college yet The disconnect here is that the article claims people as young as 12 years old are voting based on housing
Show up to your city council meetings and force the issue nimbys and landlords win because they show up locally and people who want affordable housing don't.
High housing costs are due to local policies, not Federal
Trump is talking about deporting half of the labor force that builds new housing, so he IS talking about it. He's just not talking about the consequences of his insane platform. His entire campaign is pro inflationary policy and housing will be one of the hardest hit. Can't build if you have no builders.
The President is proposing that each Federal Home Loan Bank double its annual contribution to the Affordable Housing Program – from 10 percent of prior year net income to 20 percent – which will raise an additional $3.79 billion for affordable housing over the next decade and assist nearly 380,000 households.Mar 7, 2024 If you want a candidate that is going to do something for housing, vote for Joe Biden.
At the risk of getting too political, this is kind of hilarious. During the past 3.5 years, Joe Biden's immigration policies have resulted in 7.2 MILLION people crossing the Southern border. Providing assistance for 380,000 households over the course of a decade doesn't even begin to address the damage he's done, let only address the problem.
To be fair, most of the impediments to housing happen at the local level. And there *is* a lot of attention paid to housing in local politics, for people who choose to get involved there.
Actually Biden has been talking about this. https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/08/president-biden-floats-10000-first-time-homebuyers-tax-credit.html https://www.hud.gov/press/press_releases_media_advisories/hud_no_24_103 https://www.forbes.com/sites/darylfairweather/2024/03/11/unfreezing-housing-what-bidens-plan-would-mean-for-affordability/
Nah, shows you MORE about how detached the media is, in relation to reporting on the candidates or maybe you just don't look at news sources that do? Biden has made comments on housing affordability and 3 months ago started working on plans and policies to help correct some market issues with affordable housing. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/03/07/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-plan-to-lower-housing-costs-for-working-families/#:\~:text=The%20President%20is%20proposing%20that,and%20assist%20nearly%20380%2C000%20households. Pick another thing you don't think Biden is talking about. I'll google it for you and report on it for you.
Border security, lgtbq rights and abortion are what the old people care about
Because both are responsible for the bubble and neither wants to offer a solution.
ngl... What exactly should the Fed do here? Tax cuts for new builders? They're already cutting every corner to increase profits, that's going right back into the builder's pocket... Tax rebates for first home buyers again? Would be nice to see but it's not going to be enough to offset a new home purchase. What we need is higher minimum wage - and I'm not talking $15. That was a talking point with Obama... in 2008. It's been fucking 16 years since then... With no change. The minimum wage should be much closer to 22 an hour for most in the US.
Hey, question: When you guys say "the Fed" do you mean the Federal Reserve, or the Federal Govt? I'm finding this convo hard to follow because I think people are using it interchangeably.
In this instance, they should be talking about the federal government, which is not “the Fed.”
Federal Govt in this instance.
What are you talking about? One of them clearly has a plan to tackle housing affordability by deporting all the brown people. Think about how many homes will be free!
If the youth voted in higher percentages, the politicians would give more shits about what the youth want. Until that day, be prepared for more government for old people by old people.
The day is coming for a big change.. the status quo is not sustainable.
[удалено]
That's a trick question because young voters don't vote.
exactly
Half of Gen Z is between 12-18 years old. They’re literally not voting
It doesn't matter. Theres only 2 parties to vote for and both have kept interest rates too low and caused the housing bubble to keep inflating since 2008 and both of the current choices have shown they don't want to raise rates enough to combat the housing bubble problem let alone inflation. I honestly think too many people have grown up in the bailout system and actually believe rates should go back to 0% so the immediate costs of lower rates seem lower and don't understand that the higher asking price bubble is 100% driven by those too-low rates in the first place.
[удалено]
japan tried that. Their "corporate greed" problem caused by negative rates is global news.
Trick question, they don't vote
Yeah that's what I'm wondering, because... neither candidate even has a platform. One is licking the wall paper and the other is talking about sharks attacks relentlessly. Ah, the joys of aging.
Biden has a comprehensive affordable housing plan. IDK if it's any good, or how plausible the polices are, but it's there: [FACT SHEET: President Biden Announces Plan to Lower Housing Costs for Working Families | The White House](https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/03/07/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-plan-to-lower-housing-costs-for-working-families/) [FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Announces New Actions to Boost Housing Supply and Lower Housing Costs | The White House](https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/02/29/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-new-actions-to-boost-housing-supply-and-lower-housing-costs/) etc. I think the federal govt can do some things, but there are limits to what it can accomplish given local autonomy on housing issues.
Fucking A, this doesnt line up with my belief that Biden is useless. What am I gonna do now?
Is he waiting for his second term or what?
Biden doesn't have a platform?!?!? Lol. JFC.
[удалено]
I think this is an issue a lot of us would vote for if there was a meaningful way of fixing it. Offering First time home buyer incentives is a bandaid and will just inflate prices long-term. Banning corporations/foreign investors would hurt development in developing areas of the country, but could be beneficial overall. It would however have unintended consequences on rental/vacation homes. I feel like there is no cure-all for this problem, with the only real answer being a wealth transfer from the older generations to the younger ones.
It's really not that hard. Be lenient with new builds to allow developers to make a profit, and tax to death investors with existing/old builds to drive the prices down. Operate rentals through housing coops instead of for-profit landlords. LVT is a good method for removing profits from land (see Georgism), and the taxes can be used to buy up properties from landlords as they exit the market (and rent out through coops). As land values are driven down, the cost of new builds becomes cheaper. Win win (without the freeloaders)
"As land values are driven down", so basically no homeowner would ever vote for this.
For housing prices to come down, someone has to take the L.
66% of Americans own their home. They aren't going to support drastic changes that makes housing affordable because that would directly hurt them. Older people and wealthier people own homes. And while it's 66% overall... It's much worse when you look at who votes. > 59% of eligible homeowners voted compared to 40% for renters So if you have 1000 people in a fictional town, 6600 own and 3400 rent. Then you have an election and 3,894 homeowners vote and 1,360 renters vote. Politicians pay lip service to affordable housing but they rarely do anything real to help. First time homebuyer credits just inflate prices. It helps first time home buyers at the expense of other buyers and it benefits sellers.
Housing co-ops, for those that don’t think HOAs are bad enough.
Now take a look at what proportion of the population are home owners based on the growth projections that home investors are using.. High house prices are also bad for owner occupiers that just want to live in their house, and want their children to be able to buy as well. You can easily get a majority of renters and owners that prefer lower prices, not too far in the future. And it is by far the #1 issue for many people, and a growing proportion of the population
Waiving setback and housing type zoning rules alleviates a lot of this. If a bigger house can be built, or even better a duet house, it often works out better for whomever is improving the lot
Also people forget population. If you want land prices to stay more stable, then maintain a stable population growth rate by having a better handle on immigration rates.
Yeah, that's what I'm seeing here in Europe. House prices stay elevated because buyers are buying with inheritances. Housing has become a generational issue, with only those with good financial relations will be able to buy. Tough luck if your parents / grandparents are heavy spenders though. Especially for the latter a change of policy should be welcome. How, I don't know.
That's not happening as it's going to get drained by end of life and long term care, and for the rest, the boomers have 3-4 kids, they're not going to get much at all. It will EVAPORATE not be transferred.
The policies aren't written for people where "only" a few million in elderly care will wipe them out. The rich are entirely detached from such concerns.
The rich are a small group of people. Their wealth transfer is ensured. The middle class will lose everything.
Ban any form of investment housing. Basic needs do not need to be commodities let alone fucking landbanks. Edit: there is a difference between using new builds as an investment and commoditization of existing structures. The first one is fine, the latter needs a straight up ban. Once the first person has moved it in it should officially be dwelling or purpose (shops, restaurants etc.) only.
I’m a xennial. Truly feel for these kids. Housing has been challenging for me at times and I’m an adult with good credit, an adult job, etc.
I missed the boat. At housing prices at 80% higher than two years ago, it's either the ghetto or a double wide or living in bumfuck Iowa for me. And I earn a decent living. $5000/month for what was $1500 a month 10 years ago? And they blame the youth and avocado toast for this?
I really fucked up by playing with Pokemon cards and Lego and not buying a house as a kid in 2008.
Just get rich parents so they can inherit you their home when they die obviously /s
I’m sure this survey by a realtor is methodologically sound and not a push poll in any way.
“91% of people who use a website dedicated to housing care about housing. “
Unfortunately none of the political parties are going to do anything about it since we live in a full tilt bribery (I mean "lobbying") system.
Unfortunately I don't think either candidate is going to fix the housing market. We should limit corporate home ownership and keep interest rates high until the market comes down
No, neither candidate is going to do that because we live in a capitalist system where the President literally can’t do that.
Capitalism didn't create the 30-year mortgage, FHA financing for investment properties, single family zoning, parking minimums, all this shit. When housing was part of the capitalist system we didn't have these problems.
It's not because of capitalism that the president can't issue laws bro, but he could issue a EO or two and pressure Congres to pass laws
Governing via executive order is bad and anti-democratic. It should be avoided whenever possible. The Bully Pulpit literally doesn’t work so pressuring Congress will have minimal effect. There’s tons of political science research on this. But you’re still wrong, because Biden does talk about home affordability; he even has a whole plan about it! Here it is: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/03/07/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-plan-to-lower-housing-costs-for-working-families/ The fact remains that the president doesn’t control markets, even with EOs, because of capitalism: we don’t have a centrally planned economy. This is a long running, complex issue with lots of causes, most of which are at the zoning and local market issue. Whining for Biden to fix it for you just reveals you don’t understand the issue or our system of government.
You're wasting your time. The people who dont vote have made their minds up.
They’ve tried nothing and they’re all out of ideas.
Show up to your city council meetings and ask for this then housing is expensive because landlords and nimbys show up and people who care about affordability don't
So they aren’t voting for anyone? No major political party, or politician running, has any plan to deal with housing in any way that would make a difference.
Poll on a housing website gets housing as the largest response in a poll. No shi7.
It doesn't matter. Young people don't vote, so get fucked.
It seems very unlikely this will result in votes for state and local reps that will actually remove barriers to increasing housing supply. Instead this will be, “housing got way more expensive under Biden so I’ll vote for Trump” without realizing that most of his net worth is tied up in the value of real estate.
Agreed housing costs are a concern. Disagree on how this has anything to do with either party.
Not just Gen Z. Half of millenials don't own homes either. Housing absolutely should be the number one discussion (along with inflation in general). Assholes who are telling you the economy is doing better than ever are lying through their teeth.
WTF? The PRESIDENT sets the price of housing in Texarkana and Ann Arbor??? Insane. There is not a more local issue than housing. Look at local zoning, local public transportation networks, local jobs programs for construction trades... These impact housing. The president could in a VERY indirect way provide leadership and carrot/sticks to help a little, but jeesh, is there one president candidate that just MIGHT want to see real estate developers make out like bandits??
Homes were much more affordable under 45
they're a little young to jump into the game, but considering most of their options for housing are overpriced "luxury" shitbox pods on top of breweries, i don't blame them
Little young? Boy they’re nearing 30.
damn they grow up quick. maybe the oversized clothing made me think theyre getting smaller
Broccoli cuts and perms def make them look young. The dudes at least
The oldest are 27, the youngest 12. Even of the people who can vote, they don’t until their mid 20s or older. Gen Z isn’t going to have a meaningful impact on much. Look to Millenials.
nah they're right, some of the earliest ranges for gen z have 1995 as the start year. so, 30 next year by that account
Here’s pew research defining them as 1997 https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2019/01/17/where-millennials-end-and-generation-z-begins/
great. to reiterate what i said, some of the earliest ranges have them at 1995. here's sources where that date is used included news sources and researchers: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation\_Z#cite\_note-98](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_Z#cite_note-98) pick which ever one makes you feel youngest i guess.
Housing affordability isn't just SFH. They're old enough to be in the game of paying for housing. Unfortunately most young adults can't afford to live anywhere except their parents basement.
Mass illegal immigration will only increase population and demand for housing over the next 20-30 years. I'm fortunate my kid has a nice inheritance waiting for her.
Do we have candidates that are willing to address this issue and cross boomers and homeowners
You can do it by not crossing boomers by doing new builds with controlled pricing for first time home buyers that can only be sold to other first time home buyers with no profit and not to anyone with a trust fund or inherited wealth. Make a 2nd market that is not part of the main market. But this is thinking WAY out of the box.
Funny how the ONLY candidate discussing ways to help with the housing crisis has been silenced to death
Corporations have doubled in value in the past 4 years. The cost of basic goods have increased 25-30% Has YOUR income doubled? Now go vote.
Whoa. Wait. You mean a real estate survey revealed real estate is the most important thing? I also hear 3M just did a survey and it revealed sticky notes are the best paper for wedding invitations and eviction notices.
It’s a shame both candidates and their parties have no interest in regulating housing markets.
So what’s that translate into? Who are you voting for and which housing policies are driving that choice?
My kids don't seem to give a shit how much I pay.
Since when does Gen Z vote?
Lol cant afford the home if you cant afford the insurance. Im ready for something to snap
So then they are actively interested in getting millions of undocumented immigrants back to their countries? Those people have to live somewhere. Gen Z and younger Millennials are paying the price.
And not one politician is talking about limiting large big money funds from purchasing so many homes.
Not true: https://nikemawilliams.house.gov/posts/congresswoman-nikema-williams-introduces-bicameral-legislation-to-ban-hedge-fund-ownership-of-residential-housing#
So fucking stupid. Neither president is going to/can do anything about housing prices.
We need a YIMBY party in the US.
And some of you are considering the most notorious landlord in history.
Jokes on them…this isn’t going to be fixed by regardless of who they vote for.
History shows that it can be fixed, depending on who you elect, or not. We didn’t get here by accident.
Current Administration has proposals to help this. Unfortunately, not enough people pay attention to actually news to know this. https://www.forbes.com/sites/darylfairweather/2024/03/11/unfreezing-housing-what-bidens-plan-would-mean-for-affordability/ https://www.hud.gov/press/press_releases_media_advisories/hud_no_24_103 https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/08/president-biden-floats-10000-first-time-homebuyers-tax-credit.html
[удалено]
[удалено]
Is there a link to this Redfin survey? I want to see how they asked this question.
Housing is mostly impacted by local government in terms of zoning and permit process etc. Beyond that it comes down to cost to build in the local market.
Yeah cuz we don’t wanna be homeless or indentured servants the rest of our lives.
Water. Food. Shelter. One of these is causing hardship. Of *course* it’s the top priority. It’s literally Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.
And where did they do this poll? I doubt that comes close to reproductive rights and a hot topic for gen z
Yeah but what even is a real solution? My thought is that we should ban private equity and corporations from buying homes to rent them out. They suck
And what is either candidate saying/doing about this? I’m not seeing any proposals or ideas being generated.
No shit, housing is something we all interact with in an intimate way and spend piles of our hard earned money on. Young people and working class people got screwed the hardest by inflation and the housing bubble. Unfortunately neither candidate can be trusted on this issue. All policies from both political sides seem to be in favor of inflation and asset bubbles. No surprise since that's what benefits old and wealthy people the most.
According to a Redfin survey? Where was Redfin surveying these people? On the Redfin website? I’m not saying the results are wrong, but consider the source.
I want to share this tweet but I don't see it? Can you share the original Twitter link please? The 7:47 AM tweet was about US Government debt: [https://twitter.com/unusual\_whales/status/1803801730347635122](https://twitter.com/unusual_whales/status/1803801730347635122)
They’ll vote for whoever promises them rent control and disincentivizes new supply
Jokes on us, all the politicians don’t care because they are all bought and paid for. Some democracy we live in.
The real estate lobby is huge in DC. Almost the same size/sway as Big oil, pharma. No way are they going to allow anything through that doesn't line their pockets. They are, after all, the main reason housing is so expensive.
Politicians won’t do anything. They tell you what you want to hear and do the opposite. Nothing ever gets done to help the people.
Easy -- Shut down having more than 2 properties. Shut down AirBnB. Shut down foreign investment with HB5 visas. Make it so you have to live in your primary home at least 6 months out of the year. Other countries are already doing most... catch up America.
“According to survey by housing app, most users stated pricing was a big concern”. No shit