Fuck the realestate industry period. It shouldn’t be commodified to the point where there are more empty houses up for rent, airbnb, or sitting empty as “investments” than there are homeless. Foreign companies are allowed to buy up realestate and literally extract wealth from the country for something that’s supposed to ultimately be owned by the country (hence no escaping property taxes or eminate domain)… It’s such a limitedly regulated mess that any such “free market” cannot responsibly control.
Remember that not every unit the census counts as vacant can have someone move into it. Their definition is honestly kinda weird. Some units are under construction or repair. Some are legally tied up in a divorce or estate sale. Some actually have people in them, such as non-dormitory student housing or housing for seasonal workers.
According to the census, 14.5% of vacant units for rent are vacant for less than a month, and 20.6% are vacant for more than one month but less than 2. The median vacancy has been on the market for 3.7 months, and less than 20% of vacancies have been on the market for more than 1 year.
Having a lot of units on the market for a month or two is a good thing; it means people can move to an area and find housing. You’re not going to house homeless people by sticking them into an apartment for a month or two between paying tenants.
It’s also a good thing because low vacancy rates are associated with rents going up. And the rent being too damn high increases homelessness.
Do you think those houses would’ve gotten so run down if there was soneone living in them to see the need and do maintenance?
Those houses are still in-flux instead of occupied. Do you even listen to yourself? Those houses are livable and not occupied… In factm houses in turnover is BAD because that means prices going up for renters and tax increases for owners.
It is BAD to run housing like we do. Full stop. What I said is factuallu true abd you think those houses being in turmoil is better than being owned?!
The goal should be to have affordable housing and low homeless rates.
Why should my goal be for each apartment to be moved into the day the previous occupant moves out? What’s the point?
Do you think those houses would’ve gotten so run down if there was soneone living in them to see the need and do maintenance?
I don’t think you understand that category of vacancies. Vacancies under repair isn’t “long term vacant buildings that needs repairs to become livable again”, its “any building currently being repaired or renovated that doesn’t have people actively living in it”.
My sister’s house, for example, was vacant for a couple months when she renovated her kitchen. It was owner- occupied just before the renovation and just after, but it was vacant during the renovation because she temporarily moved in with my parents.
After natural disasters, there’s often a lot of housing that’s vacant under repair.
If you don’t understand the fundamental difference between a house that is rented and one that is owned, I really do not know what to say. You do not care if people own their own value. Sad.
Fuck the realestate industry period. It shouldn’t be commodified to the point where there are more empty houses up for rent, airbnb, or sitting empty as “investments” than there are homeless.
Yes, there’s more apartments sitting empty for a month or two than there are homeless people.
There are fewer apartments for rent sitting empty for a year or more than there are homeless people.
How exactly are you proposing that we fix the homelessness crisis with apartments sitting empty for a month?
Owner-occupied housing is great. The only person who brought it up before this was me, when I pointed out that some vacant homes are actually owner-occupied.
Fuck the realestate industry period. It shouldn’t be commodified to the point where there are more empty houses up for rent, airbnb, or sitting empty as “investments” than there are homeless. Foreign companies are allowed to buy up realestate and literally extract wealth from the country for something that’s supposed to ultimately be owned by the country (hence no escaping property taxes or eminate domain)… It’s such a limitedly regulated mess that any such “free market” cannot responsibly control.
We should ban foreign nationals and corporations from owning real estate here, with reasonable exceptions.
No exceptions except immigration. Your corporation needs a factory? Fine, the land and building will be owned by the US and you will pay to rent it.
Remember that not every unit the census counts as vacant can have someone move into it. Their definition is honestly kinda weird. Some units are under construction or repair. Some are legally tied up in a divorce or estate sale. Some actually have people in them, such as non-dormitory student housing or housing for seasonal workers.
According to the census, 14.5% of vacant units for rent are vacant for less than a month, and 20.6% are vacant for more than one month but less than 2. The median vacancy has been on the market for 3.7 months, and less than 20% of vacancies have been on the market for more than 1 year.
Having a lot of units on the market for a month or two is a good thing; it means people can move to an area and find housing. You’re not going to house homeless people by sticking them into an apartment for a month or two between paying tenants.
It’s also a good thing because low vacancy rates are associated with rents going up. And the rent being too damn high increases homelessness.
Do you think those houses would’ve gotten so run down if there was soneone living in them to see the need and do maintenance?
Those houses are still in-flux instead of occupied. Do you even listen to yourself? Those houses are livable and not occupied… In factm houses in turnover is BAD because that means prices going up for renters and tax increases for owners.
It is BAD to run housing like we do. Full stop. What I said is factuallu true abd you think those houses being in turmoil is better than being owned?!
Why is having housing in flux a bad thing?
The goal should be to have affordable housing and low homeless rates.
Why should my goal be for each apartment to be moved into the day the previous occupant moves out? What’s the point?
I don’t think you understand that category of vacancies. Vacancies under repair isn’t “long term vacant buildings that needs repairs to become livable again”, its “any building currently being repaired or renovated that doesn’t have people actively living in it”.
My sister’s house, for example, was vacant for a couple months when she renovated her kitchen. It was owner- occupied just before the renovation and just after, but it was vacant during the renovation because she temporarily moved in with my parents.
After natural disasters, there’s often a lot of housing that’s vacant under repair.
If you don’t understand the fundamental difference between a house that is rented and one that is owned, I really do not know what to say. You do not care if people own their own value. Sad.
What are you even talking about?
You originally said
Yes, there’s more apartments sitting empty for a month or two than there are homeless people.
There are fewer apartments for rent sitting empty for a year or more than there are homeless people.
How exactly are you proposing that we fix the homelessness crisis with apartments sitting empty for a month?
Owner-occupied housing is great. The only person who brought it up before this was me, when I pointed out that some vacant homes are actually owner-occupied.
deleted by creator
Not society, but rather a bunch of detached money pushers
deleted by creator
You just wrote what they wrote, but blamed “society” instead of the actual assholes making the profits
deleted by creator