Solving the home crisis in 3 steps. amirite?

Cities in western Canada that made short term rentals illegal had an immediate influx of homes into the market.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Yeah but at the cost of profits to the local landlords

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Aw. But they still can make money renting long term, just not as much.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

It is normal in many (most?) Countries to require people to be a citizen to own a house. I would think a fair compromise is for a requirement that you must be a citizen or lawful permanent resident to own any home other than a primary residence. There are a lot of investment homes in my area from Chinese investors that sit empty

by Realistic-Gold 1 month ago

What your plan would do is tank the housing market because of what would be forced into the marketplace by ineligible owners all at once, and we know that with a tanked property market the economy follows.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Burn it all down

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Surely there could be a way to slow walk these laws?

by Anonymous 1 month ago

You just named a bunch of things that are unconstitutional (assuming you are American). Also what if I have a single person LLC that owns my home for business purposes? Is that illegal under your proposal?

by Bulah08 1 month ago

Make it constitutional then. Add exceptions that are not gonna have obvious loopholes

by Anonymous 1 month ago

This is a miniscule amount of housing Who is supposed to own basically most things that aren't single family homes? This is just a mixture of almost certainly never being upheld by a court, and wildly unpopular

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Step 4: Sing Soviet national anthem

by Anonymous 1 month ago

But in that case, nobody owns their home.

by Fair-Imagination 1 month ago

2 and 3 do nothing to solve anything.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

This is a ridiculous proposal. Institutional investors of any kind own 574,000 homes. AirBnB worldwide has 7.7 million listings. Let's assume all of those are American. Considering that America has 140 million homes, you described a 7% increase in homes. Actual statistics do not back up your argument. The predominant driver of rising housing costs is zoning laws. The same zoning and laws which raise consumer homes has ANNIHILATED corporate buildings. Large downtown buildings which went for 100s of millions a few decades ago are now selling for 20 to 30 million. 80 to 90 percent losses.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

You did not explain how that would solve the home crisis.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

That would bankrupt me (I'm Canadian but same problem) my house is basically all my worth if the market crashes so does my nest egg. The economy couldn't survive this so many peoples wealth is their home

by Suspicious-Half 1 month ago

You wouldn't be allowed to own it anyways, didn't you read? Only US citizens get to own residential property.

by Mariekuhic 1 month ago

Nothing here says you can't own the equity in your own home.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

It would tremendously increase the supply. Making demand lower and more affordable housing.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

You did not explain how that would increase the supply. Especially step 2.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Well, if large investment companies and corporations can't own them, they must sell them on the market to citizens who are looking for a home.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

But those houses are already inhabited such that the people who live there are not participating in the market to buy a home. If they could buy the house they live in instead of renting, that could help a little but it doesn't increase supply without also increasing demand. I think we just need to build more houses and reduce restrictions to do so.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Citizens only? Not even lawful permanent residents?

by Anonymous 1 month ago

I agree with you. Just would allow anyone that's a resident to own. Not just citizens. It would get rid of the rental market though so you need to replace that with something. I'd propose rental buildings would still be allowed to be owned by corporations. And I would want the government to also build, own, and manage rental properties themselves. If more rentals are needed, the government should be building them. And the government would be less inclined to price gouge.

by Routine-Equipment 1 month ago

Lol, #2 is basically kick existing tennants out of their homes if they cannot afford to purchase it outright. You truly cooked with this one.

by hillardrohan 1 month ago

Allow zoning for high density residents. The only reason corproations buy residential properties is because they cannot just build more. If Tokyo and Chongqing has no housing crisis, then there really is no excuse for American Cities

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Or, just tax mofos who own more than 1 property...problem solved. You want to be a tycoon fine, but you wont be printing money from it

by Front-Leading 1 month ago

Americans aren't in a housing crisis. Come to Australia and see what a housing cost crisis really is. I could buy a house tomorrow if I lived in the US

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Americans are in a ‘I want a mansion for $200k for my first house' crisis. This goes right along with their ‘I won't drive a vehicle that is more than 2 years old and I have to have a boat, sxs and rv' attitude.

by Hillsmargot 1 month ago

100%, "I'm 25 and I don't have my house paid off yet, how are all these 60+ year olds doing so well?!"

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Anyone have ~ numbers on how many home are owned by corporate/llc and such?

by Playful-Strength 1 month ago

In america, about 4% but I think the bigger problem is the type of home. From my own experience is that the homes they are buying and renting or flipping are what would be your cheaper starter homes. This makes it impossible for people to get into the housing market. A friend of mine was working with my wife to find a fixer upper to move into, every single one they looked at got a cash offer by a business. It was pretty much impossible to find anything under 200k.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Sounds like two issues in that. One being that they buy to rent. Another is that they have already bought the cheaper homes, flipped them, and now raised the cost CoL for said area. Any foresight or ideas for the secondary issue? The one being that they've bought the cheap homes and flipped them already raising the cost and such.

by Playful-Strength 1 month ago

It's hard to find rent to own, and even so, if you move before you own it, you get nothing. Realistically I don't think there is anything that will fix the issue without dramatic and catastrophic side effects.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Define business because no intelligent person owns a rental in their own name.

by Anonymous 1 month ago