Why should people be allowed to invest in real estate? It's a scarce resource. Houses can be unoccupied for years by an investor or retiree, while a studio apartment in the same neighborhood costs $1,600/month.
REITs can buy up all the land in a high-demand area, and build expensive luxury rental properties. This makes houses even more expensive in the area.
Jeff Bezos bought millions of acres in Texas. Jack Ma bought millions of acres in Upstate New York. Meanwhile the Average Joe can't even afford land to build a house in a centrally located area in an economically healthy location with jobs.
He is forced to rent a tiny "luxury" apartment ("luxury" defined by REITs as having basic modern amenities like chrome appliances and faux granite countertops) for over $1,000 a month. Or he can pay $900 and drive an hour extra to and from work every day.
Meanwhile baby boomers have huge houses with thousands of unused square footage without a mortgage. As seniors they pay little to no property taxes in most states. Or they "downsize" into huge apartments paying $2,000-$3,000 a month.
Why can't people have one house and that's it. Speculating fucks the rest of us over.
There are plenty of cheap plots of land all over the US. Just build your house on one of those.
Logan Smith
>speculating fucks the rest of us over
No it doesn't. If you own property the price of the property will fluxuate with the market. Before you buy a house you have to make an informed decision that will lead to the appreciation of your property which is nothing more than an asset.
They do this same exact thing with every dollar you hold, so why go after private property when it's one of the most redpilled things?
Landon Fisher
Speculation and investing are not the same thing. If you do not understand this then you should stay quiet about this topic.
Lucas Sanders
>Why do you deserve to be able to afford a house?
I'm not saying that.
>There are plenty of cheap plots of land all over the US. Just build your house on one of those.
>jobs in area >land is expensive as fuck
Who wants to commute 2 hours everyday so you can have a cheap plot of land.
The point is investors & REITs are artificially inflating land/housing values in centrally located areas close to jobs with low commute at the expense of the little guy who just want to rent/buy something affordable close to work.
Cameron Williams
I don't know. It doesn't seem inherently bad to me. Speculators help the economy by buying the homes from the people who were selling them in the first place. This process frees up the sellers to pursue other economic interests.
Jeremiah Brown
Because fuck you, statist nigger.
Ryder Martinez
Did not intend fascist flag.
Grayson Robinson
Freudian slip, nigger. One day you will wake up, and accept the true red pill.
I suppose that's okay in low demand areas. But in higher demand areas, houses don't stay on the market for more than a week. Speculators will buy them, tear them down, build huge homes and sell them to high rollers.
Lucas Garcia
Lots of ignorant comments by people who live in moms basement or live in nowhere USA.
What you are saying, why can't someone with a decent jobnot afford a nice house in an urban area, and it's because of real estate investors driving up the cost, is 100% a good concern.
You either have to buy a hugely over priced house in the suberbs or pay a hugely over inflated rent to live closer to work.
Personally I bought a home on 3 acres and an area being taken over by home developers and commute an hour to work but in 5 years my home value should go up to make it worth the time investment.
Capitalism means the rich take advantage of you, welcome
Jacob Ortiz
The Fed owns the mortgage market. It owns 1/3 of MBS and lends money at 0% to banks who buy up homes as investments.
Housing is unaffordable by design. They want us in small apartments that make large families impossible.
Cameron Adams
Yea, the government just made a huge deal with single family Home owning REITS.....holy fuck I just got red pilled more by this thread.
Samuel Gonzalez
Why do they want population to shrink but make such a huge deal about shrinking population? Don't give me they want to import muslims
Dominic White
>Who wants to commute 2 hours everyday
There's your problem, citycuck.
Luis Bennett
>Who wants to commute 2 hours everyday so you can have a cheap plot of land Hardly anyone, hence most are willing to pay a premium not to.
John Murphy
the middle class for nearly 50 years did. in a time long forgotten, people wanted to own a house. it was a pride, accomplishment thing. plus a lot of the majority cities didn't have enough land to build houses so even those who had money, couldn't find anything.
then crime started to go up in the major cities forcing people to flee to the suburbs.
commuting isn't so awful if our highway system wasn't so damn congested. i grew up in cali and my dad used to commute since he worked in the elevator industry. so it didn't matter where we lived because he had to drive upwards to 100 miles one way numerous times. but when before the mid 90's traffic wasn't so bad. i mean it was bad for 90's standards, but not like it is today where just 15 miles can take an hour. then you could go 40 miles in an hour.
They want people smart enough to work, but too dumb to see the forest for the trees and easy to control.
If I could live in the country, and have a stable income I would do it. What am I supposed to do be a farmer? Jobs are not stable these days. You can get hired and fired any time. I can't rely on a job to be there the next 30 years in Birmingham where houses are cheap.
Yes, but it's not just us worker class paying the premium. It's investors and speculators buying up the area pushing up the prices; making the premium artificially even higher than it would othewise be. I.e., the premium if it were just us Joes, the rent would be $600-$700, but with REITs and speculators/investors it's $1,500-$1,600/month.
Another thing is the spics and illegals clogging up the highways. 10 spics will rent a 1 bedroom apartment in a shitty complex, making the quality of living worse for everyone else there.
Foreign investors buying up homes and land is another problem pushing up values.
Dominic Jones
Hey I know where that is
Thomas Murphy
>Average Joe can't even afford land to build a house in a centrally located area in an economically healthy location with jobs.
>in a centrally located area
people compete for the most valuable land by offering more money to purchase it.
every time this happens, or demand increases, people are willing to pay a higher price for it.
If you owned a piece of land, would you want to be able to sell to the highest bidder?
Colton Foster
Where the fuck are the trees?
I would If I owned that development I would just plant fuckloads of trees.
Xavier Ross
>people compete for the most valuable land by offering more money to purchase it. >every time this happens, or demand increases, people are willing to pay a higher price for it.
Yes, but should people have to compete with REITs, speculators, retired investors, and foreign investors?
>If you owned a piece of land, would you want to be able to sell to the highest bidder?
I wouldn't own real property for speculation or investment, but for fucking living. I.e., shelter. It's a money pit as it is without all the overvaluation making it even worse.
Brody Nelson
The pic looks like when starting a new game in city skylines or simcity. WTF if that.
Eli Ortiz
Never understood why homes are assumed to be a continually appreciating asset. Literally everything else you buy loses value over time, except that giant piece of shit built in the 60's with a collapsing roof. That's worth 10x what it was 50 years ago.
Camden Taylor
>Yes, but should people have to compete with REITs, speculators, retired investors...
You know, you could do one of those things as well.
>and foreign investors?
This part I'll give you, I don't think that competing with foreign nations for land prices is all that wise a national strategy.
>I wouldn't own real property for speculation or investment, but for fucking living. I.e., shelter.
What about opening a business?
Like a grocery story?
Like the one that sells you all of the food you need to live?
Are you saying that's bad?
What about owning a piece of land to grow food on?
IS that bad as well, since it's not a dwelling?
Ethan Clark
why does (((pol))) always protect and shill for billionaire globalists?
Jordan Young
b/c youre an idiot. They paid millions to clear cut and level the fucking place.
every "neighborhood gets built like this. Its America not france. We pre-plan. That means we put in water electric and sewer lines your builders can find in each lot. Morons in europe want to talk shit when their streets are to narrow to drive a fucking car down. meanwhile in the USA a patch of desert is ready willing and able to have the next major air hub put on it.
Justin Powell
>I don't want people to be able to buy land Just stop.
Nicholas Bailey
Success is not bad, being wealthy, even outlandishly wealthy is not bad. Punishing success by merit is Marxist dogmatic horseshit. The issue is how these people managed to acquire their wealth, and the fact that they're buying influence in government with it, not that they have it.
Andrew Morales
Cause it's not the house, it's the land. It's running off the hopefully incorrect assumption that the population is perpetually increasing, therefore the demand for land is increasing.
(((They))) have successfully sold us the lies that living with your parents is shameful, that you need a huge house with most of the space never used.
I know the shit is overvalued cause of speculation and chinks, but i don't know how we can get the bubble to pop since land is so "essential".
Mason Johnson
It's le free market xd propaganda.
>You know, you could do one of those things as well.
Why should I have to speculate and go into debt just to provide basic shelter for myself or my family?
>What about opening a business? >Like a grocery story? >Like the one that sells you all of the food you need to live? >Are you saying that's bad? >What about owning a piece of land to grow food on? >IS that bad as well, since it's not a dwelling?
No, that's fine. The owners are doing something with the land. They are not just trying to accumulate as much real property as they can to sell it later at a higher price or "developing" it into residential rentals few can afford.
REITs aren't people. Rich retirees and foreign investors have no use for the real property other than making money at the sacrifice of average Joe's affordability.
Isaac Adams
They shouldn't
Daniel Martinez
Because ((they)) use rent as tool of population control, And you can't change that fact as they make the rules. Remember what the rothschild said: Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes the laws.
Only way to to make things more saneis by controlling our money, We must issue our own money.
That is why they are so scared of cryptos, as they are completely decentralized and out of their control.
I endorse that we all start using cryptos. some clever user from biz had the idea of creating a tipping cryptocurrency for Sup Forums for these reasons, it's pic related and is called the Wojak
I think it would be great if all Sup Forums started to get familiar with cryptos and that is why I would like to see this idea succeed
Nathan Smith
>at the sacrifice of average Joe's affordability. You're trying to enforce a system of fairness, and that is inherently unjust. In a completely free market with no government oversight real estate would still be a sound investment. You stopping it would require state intervention.
Jaxon Reyes
Forgot pic
You can get wojaks from the Waves Lite Client and receive them there in your wallet as well
Alexander Wright
Maybe you should get working so you can earn that land!
Gavin Johnson
>He changes his flag, ever Ishygddt
Jack Bell
my only gripe is that noncitizens can buy land t land owner of six rental properties
James Lee
>REEEE WHY DOES CAPITALISM EXIST kill yourself commie scum
Leo Price
>Why can't people have one house and that's it. Goodbye rentals.
Angel Parker
The market is not free, its controlled by those with money. Theres no feed back mechanism for renters to dictate prices. They'll slowly creep up over time as everyone adheres to the core concept of greed. Without any way for the renter to seek relief outside of government regulation.
Charles Sanchez
>Punishing success by merit is Marxist dogmatic horseshit. How about success by initial advantage?
Jose Peterson
>have buildings from before USA was a country >not wanting to completely erase all historic and cultural buildings its a fact that they have to deal with buildings and solutions that predates your country but you are a moron if you can't realize that
Angel Scott
If someone inherits wealth or is born into it you think they should be disadvantaged by the state? This is a terrible notion. The market unrestricted has mechanisms to facilitate competition in any circumstance. Not everyone will become equally wealthy, but everyone has the opportunity to advance their position in life, and no other system save the free market has that capacity. If you go about things thinking that you need to make things fair you're falling into an infantile line of thinking.
Christopher Moore
No not inheritance.
I'm talking about initial conditions.
>The market unrestricted has mechanisms to facilitate competition in any circumstance. Not everyone will become equally wealthy, but everyone has the opportunity to advance their position in life, and no other system save the free market has that capacity. >If you go about things thinking that you need to make things fair you're falling into an infantile line of thinking.
The government will lend to banks money it creates on the demand of the banks at a rate below every other option to borrow money. Allowing banks to borrow money and lend it at a profit. If you let me borrow money at prime rate I too could make a business worth billions.
When the credit crunch of 2008 happened banks stopped lending money to businesses that had be depending on always working with loans. They could no longer conduct business and many had to sell assets or lost so much value that they were bought out.
The same banks that had cut the credit swooped in and bought those assets and businesses. Then waiting a few years flipped them, turning a profit off the value lost to other investors and owners.
If you let me control the whole credit market I too could create shortages, then buy depressed assets and flip them for profit.
Explain what mechanism stops this.
Christopher Flores
>The government will lend to banks money The government in this capacity is acting as an intermediary for the Federal Reserve. Your entire premise is a situation that could only exist when government intervention is preventing free competition in the market.
Cooper Wilson
Because housing is not a right.
Hunter Scott
Oh god why didn't you tell me you were a "monopolies can only exist because of a government" retard so I could ignore you and your stupidity?
Also good job not answering the question as it currently applies to the world we live in today. I'll take your deflection as an admission that unfair initial conditions do make some people wealthy while others are stuck no matter how able or competent they are. And that we need an actual solution to that problem not just ancap retardism.
Nolan Price
Maybe their ancestors should've thought about planning shit out instead of building shit wherever they wanted
Julian Stewart
Barriers to entry in the market and protection by the state stop individuals from freely competing with existing large entities in the market. Read at least one econ book before you make stupid assumptions.
Oliver Jones
We need to remove term limits for presidents for this type of progress to happen quickly. A government like that of Starship Troopers (the book) would perform well.
John Murphy
Are you me?
Alexander Adams
>thinks the problem is government red tape and not to the billions in tools, tech, know-how and brand recognition needed to challenge a monopoly >thinks the banks will happily give you some billions and let you "freely compete" vs a monopoly >thinks a monopoly can't simply run a deficit for 6 months and completely crush the smaller competitors thanks to scale economies >thinks a monopoly can't just buy the competitors Libertarianism truly is a mind illness
