850
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 09 Jun 2024
850 points (98.4% liked)
News
23424 readers
1527 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
A 3% cap is absurdly low. While people are saying "don't threaten me with a good time," this also means there are going to be fewer new units. Although considering how few units many CA cities have been adding (some have even removed units), it might not have too much of an effect on that regard. I would could see maintenance on existing units dropping and many more unofficial units popping up.
Fewer units, but more home ownership.
We don't want to be a nation of renters. It's not good for society; it's only good for a minority of individuals.
And fewer new units? Where are you pulling that from? It just means developers will be building for home owners, not renters. Like they did back in the Good Old Days, when young people could actually realistically consider buying a home someday. You know, re-creating the conditions that the younger generations are always bitching about that boomers had which aren't available anymore. Back when not all the land was owned by a few giant corporations.
Fuck renters. Fuck them right in the ear. They can all go eat a dick.
Disclaimer: I've owned every house I've lived in since 1998, and even with that collateral, every purchase has gotten harder to find and more expensive. So much of America is owned by property developers, it's disgusting.
Fuck. Renters.
You...blame the people who can't afford to own for renting and also blame that same situation for making it harder for you to buy? You seem to be missing the point here.
Not sure how their unhinged comment is being upvoted.
It's not my fault the stupid word means both people renting, and the owners who rent the place out. I'd hoped the context would have made it clear to which I was referring, in each use.
Lol I've never in my life heard a landlord referred to as a renter. It's a funny situation but I have to say this ones on you :p
So you hate people who cannot afford to plunk down thousands of dollars to get a place. Cool. /s
I hate that "renters" mean both people who rent, and rent out. It's a stupid word.
There is a place for rentals, but it's gone far beyond reasonable. Property developers are responsible for the housing crisis and the inability for younger generations to even contemplate owning a home.
In English we use the term landlord. Renter is generally understood to mean someone who rents.
In British English, "renter" - means both (in the OED). So, you mean "in American."
But, yes; I concede landlord may have been a better term, although not all renters who lease properties to others are also landlords; for one example, subletters are renters (in both meanings of the word) but not landlords.
Renters (landlords) are necessary; the real problem I'm railing against is property developers turning single family homes (or apartments[^1]) and farmland into rental properties.
[^1] in 'Murican, the word "apartment" has rental connotations. I'm using it here in the "a unit in a larger building of units, either owned or rented out."
In British English, "renter" - means both (in the OED). So, you mean "in American."
But, yes; I concede landlord may have been a better term, although not all renters who lease properties to others are also landlords; for one example, subletters are renters (in both meanings of the word) but not landlords.
Renters (landlords) are necessary; the real problem I'm railing against is property developers turning single family homes (or apartments[^1]) and farmland into rental properties.
[^1] in 'Murican, the word "apartment" has rental connotations. I'm using it here in the "a unit in a larger building of units, either owned or rented out."
3% is about average inflation, why is "making constant money including adjusting for inflation" low?
Well if you recall, there was a year where general inflation was far above 3%. Inflation is also not uniform and can be higher in some cities than others. And this is not inflation + 3%, it is 3%. Many people also have to borrow to build which means they are not simply paying the rate of inflation but what the banks are charging to borrow. Currently that is around 7%. So anyone looking to build units is looking at a negative return if they borrow to do it which means they simply will not.
Make no mistake, I do agree with caps but something that is not static makes more sense. Having it a static rate will lead to large unintended consequences.
Do you mean the year 2008 when there was too much investment in real estate? Or the year 2020 when there was a moratorium on evictions and lumber prices soared?