BF2S Forums Investment

Larssen wrote:

uziq wrote:

Jay wrote:

You are aware of NIMBY, yes? You are aware that home owners are a very powerful voting bloc and their primary goal is to protect their own property value, yes? I mean, personally, I don't see my house as a financial investment, so I don't care as much as other people, but those people are politically more powerful than any renters. Between zoning laws, and environmental laws, and public review sessions etc, noisy activists have shut down development all over the most expensive parts of this country. It entrenches and enriches the people who already own property at the expense of people entering the market fresh. I live in one of the most fucked up housing markets in the world. Most of my generation has fled to other states in order to avoid the crushing property prices and taxes. The ones that remain are either doing well enough to stay, even through the pain, or they've inherited homes. I truly wish I had the courage to abandon this place and move someplace cheaper. I would miss my family too much though

the reason governments won’t depress the value of houses or pierce the bubble is because of the huge amount of banking credit tied up in mortgages. in a country like the UK it is by far the greatest part of the investment portfolio of all our major banks. building more affordable housing will crash the banks. that’s the situation we are in.

I see this as probably one of the biggest if not the biggest economic challenge ahead of us on the long term. The housing market absolutely needs reform.

We could also ignore it, though I don't think that would spell good things for social cohesion or services in our cities/countries.

Jay wrote:

Larssen wrote:

uziq wrote:

the reason governments won’t depress the value of houses or pierce the bubble is because of the huge amount of banking credit tied up in mortgages. in a country like the UK it is by far the greatest part of the investment portfolio of all our major banks. building more affordable housing will crash the banks. that’s the situation we are in.

I see this as probably one of the biggest if not the biggest economic challenge ahead of us on the long term. The housing market absolutely needs reform.

We could also ignore it, though I don't think that would spell good things for social cohesion or services in our cities/countries.

What needs to be reformed? What makes you like a certain place would undoubtedly be destroyed if more housing were made available.

It all comes down to supply and demand. Demand is astronomical because everyone wants to live in a tiny percentage of planetary land area, while supply is static.

The real reform that is needed is people changing their tastes and desires. Not everyone needs to live in Manhattan. Not everyone should even want to. Manhattan sucks. Who wants to live in a grid, piled on top of your neighbors, surrounded by concrete? Because it's exciting? Any place can be exciting.

Last edited by uziq (2020-04-14 13:20:42)

uziq wrote:

Jay wrote:

Larssen wrote:

I see this as probably one of the biggest if not the biggest economic challenge ahead of us on the long term. The housing market absolutely needs reform.

We could also ignore it, though I don't think that would spell good things for social cohesion or services in our cities/countries.

What needs to be reformed? What makes you like a certain place would undoubtedly be destroyed if more housing were made available.

It all comes down to supply and demand. Demand is astronomical because everyone wants to live in a tiny percentage of planetary land area, while supply is static.

The real reform that is needed is people changing their tastes and desires. Not everyone needs to live in Manhattan. Not everyone should even want to. Manhattan sucks. Who wants to live in a grid, piled on top of your neighbors, surrounded by concrete? Because it's exciting? Any place can be exciting.

you really are a simpleton.

nobody is talking about building houses in central park. people are happy to build entire new towns here in the UK. central planning on a massive scale. forget 'moving to cool hotspots' or 'building up desirable areas'. we are talking about building persimmon homes on empty link roads outside provincial towns. we're talking putting down 10,000s of identikit semi-detached houses in fields in the countryside. that's the sort of mass-building that will pop the housing bubble.

housing is not affordable for the majority of young people, period. you keep talking about manhattan and hipsters as if every single college graduate is trying to live out their dreams of being an indie guitarist in bed-stuy.

Jay wrote:

uziq wrote:

Jay wrote:

What needs to be reformed? What makes you like a certain place would undoubtedly be destroyed if more housing were made available.

It all comes down to supply and demand. Demand is astronomical because everyone wants to live in a tiny percentage of planetary land area, while supply is static.

The real reform that is needed is people changing their tastes and desires. Not everyone needs to live in Manhattan. Not everyone should even want to. Manhattan sucks. Who wants to live in a grid, piled on top of your neighbors, surrounded by concrete? Because it's exciting? Any place can be exciting.

you really are a simpleton.

nobody is talking about building houses in central park. people are happy to build entire new towns here in the UK. central planning on a massive scale. forget 'moving to cool hotspots' or 'building up desirable areas'. we are talking about building persimmon homes on empty link roads outside provincial towns. we're talking putting down 10,000s of identikit semi-detached houses in fields in the countryside. that's the sort of mass-building that will pop the housing bubble.

housing is not affordable for the majority of young people, period. you keep talking about manhattan and hipsters as if every single college graduate is trying to live out their dreams of being an indie guitarist in bed-stuy.

Why aren't you in Milton Keynes instead of Bristol?

Jay wrote:

You are aware of NIMBY, yes? You are aware that home owners are a very powerful voting bloc and their primary goal is to protect their own property value, yes? I mean, personally, I don't see my house as a financial investment, so I don't care as much as other people, but those people are politically more powerful than any renters. Between zoning laws, and environmental laws, and public review sessions etc, noisy activists have shut down development all over the most expensive parts of this country. It entrenches and enriches the people who already own property at the expense of people entering the market fresh. I live in one of the most fucked up housing markets in the world. Most of my generation has fled to other states in order to avoid the crushing property prices and taxes. The ones that remain are either doing well enough to stay, even through the pain, or they've inherited homes. I truly wish I had the courage to abandon this place and move someplace cheaper. I would miss my family too much though

Jay wrote:

uziq wrote:

Jay wrote:

What needs to be reformed? What makes you like a certain place would undoubtedly be destroyed if more housing were made available.

It all comes down to supply and demand. Demand is astronomical because everyone wants to live in a tiny percentage of planetary land area, while supply is static.

The real reform that is needed is people changing their tastes and desires. Not everyone needs to live in Manhattan. Not everyone should even want to. Manhattan sucks. Who wants to live in a grid, piled on top of your neighbors, surrounded by concrete? Because it's exciting? Any place can be exciting.

you really are a simpleton.

nobody is talking about building houses in central park. people are happy to build entire new towns here in the UK. central planning on a massive scale. forget 'moving to cool hotspots' or 'building up desirable areas'. we are talking about building persimmon homes on empty link roads outside provincial towns. we're talking putting down 10,000s of identikit semi-detached houses in fields in the countryside. that's the sort of mass-building that will pop the housing bubble.

housing is not affordable for the majority of young people, period. you keep talking about manhattan and hipsters as if every single college graduate is trying to live out their dreams of being an indie guitarist in bed-stuy.

Why aren't you in Milton Keynes instead of Bristol?

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

You are aware of NIMBY, yes? You are aware that home owners are a very powerful voting bloc and their primary goal is to protect their own property value, yes? I mean, personally, I don't see my house as a financial investment, so I don't care as much as other people, but those people are politically more powerful than any renters. Between zoning laws, and environmental laws, and public review sessions etc, noisy activists have shut down development all over the most expensive parts of this country. It entrenches and enriches the people who already own property at the expense of people entering the market fresh. I live in one of the most fucked up housing markets in the world. Most of my generation has fled to other states in order to avoid the crushing property prices and taxes. The ones that remain are either doing well enough to stay, even through the pain, or they've inherited homes. I truly wish I had the courage to abandon this place and move someplace cheaper. I would miss my family too much though

So basically land needs to be freed up so you and your three kids can get cheap land.

Not everyone wants their country turned into infinite suburban sprawl, not just to see an ever expanding population expand forever.

You're free to move wherever you like whenever you like, stop whining.

People don't fight houses much, they fight apartments. No one wants poor people in their school districts.