So if a housing developer won’t be able to build housing developments?
Housing is expensive because there is not enough housing supply – it’s grown more slowly than the population, and the population has become significantly more urbanized, meaning many rural areas have tons of excess capacity, exacerbating the problem.
In the States, the percent of housing occupied by the owner has remained steady for the last 60 years, but the ratio of housing available to households has declined considerably. In other words, it ain’t corporate-owned-housing that’s making the cost of housing go up.
If you want the price of housing to go down, you either need to a) move people to where the excess housing is, or b) create excess housing where the people are.
The sort of solution you’re proposing would simply mean even fewer houses get built, making the problem even worse. It’s not well thought out.
OP didn’t say that, the pic says corporations shouldn’t be allowed to purchase housing
So if I own a house on 10 acres that’s zoned residential, a real estate developer can’t buy it and put up 10 houses?
If a property is condemned, hugely dilapidated, etc … A contractor can’t buy it with his LLC, fix it up, and sell it?
This is a solution that attacks something that isn’t actually contributing to the problem, in such a way as to exacerbate the problem. That’s … Not a solution.
So if a housing developer won’t be able to build housing developments?
Housing is expensive because there is not enough housing supply – it’s grown more slowly than the population, and the population has become significantly more urbanized, meaning many rural areas have tons of excess capacity, exacerbating the problem.
In the States, the percent of housing occupied by the owner has remained steady for the last 60 years, but the ratio of housing available to households has declined considerably. In other words, it ain’t corporate-owned-housing that’s making the cost of housing go up.
If you want the price of housing to go down, you either need to a) move people to where the excess housing is, or b) create excess housing where the people are.
The sort of solution you’re proposing would simply mean even fewer houses get built, making the problem even worse. It’s not well thought out.
OP didn’t say that, the pic says corporations shouldn’t be allowed to purchase housing. They can still build it then sell it on to individuals.
So if I own a house on 10 acres that’s zoned residential, a real estate developer can’t buy it and put up 10 houses?
If a property is condemned, hugely dilapidated, etc … A contractor can’t buy it with his LLC, fix it up, and sell it?
This is a solution that attacks something that isn’t actually contributing to the problem, in such a way as to exacerbate the problem. That’s … Not a solution.
If they sell it, then yes there isn’t an issue with what OP is stating.