Cities in western Canada that made short term rentals illegal had an immediate influx of homes into the market.
by Anonymous1 year ago
Yeah but at the cost of profits to the local landlords
by Anonymous1 year ago
Aw. But they still can make money renting long term, just not as much.
by Anonymous1 year 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-Gold1 year 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 Anonymous1 year ago
Burn it all down
by Anonymous1 year ago
Surely there could be a way to slow walk these laws?
by Anonymous1 year 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 Bulah081 year ago
Make it constitutional then. Add exceptions that are not gonna have obvious loopholes
by Anonymous1 year 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 Anonymous1 year ago
Step 4: Sing Soviet national anthem
by Anonymous1 year ago
But in that case, nobody owns their home.
by Fair-Imagination1 year ago
2 and 3 do nothing to solve anything.
by Anonymous1 year 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 Anonymous1 year ago
You did not explain how that would solve the home crisis.
by Anonymous1 year 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-Half1 year ago
You wouldn't be allowed to own it anyways, didn't you read? Only US citizens get to own residential property.
by Mariekuhic1 year ago
Nothing here says you can't own the equity in your own home.
by Anonymous1 year ago
It would tremendously increase the supply. Making demand lower and more affordable housing.
by Anonymous1 year ago
You did not explain how that would increase the supply. Especially step 2.
by Anonymous1 year 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 Anonymous1 year 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 Anonymous1 year ago
Citizens only? Not even lawful permanent residents?
by Anonymous1 year 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-Equipment1 year 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 hillardrohan1 year 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 Anonymous1 year 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-Leading1 year 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 Anonymous1 year 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 Hillsmargot1 year 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 Anonymous1 year ago
Anyone have ~ numbers on how many home are owned by corporate/llc and such?
by Playful-Strength1 year 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 Anonymous1 year 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-Strength1 year 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 Anonymous1 year ago
Define business because no intelligent person owns a rental in their own name.
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Realistic-Gold 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Bulah08 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Fair-Imagination 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Suspicious-Half 1 year ago
by Mariekuhic 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Routine-Equipment 1 year ago
by hillardrohan 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Front-Leading 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Hillsmargot 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Playful-Strength 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Playful-Strength 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago
by Anonymous 1 year ago