▲ 1364 ▼ What could go wrong? (lemmy.world) submitted 1 year ago by The_Picard_Maneuver@lemmy.world to c/microblogmemes@lemmy.world 191 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] slaveOne@reddthat.com 2 points 1 year ago* (2 children) How does that lower the cost of homes though? Edit: to be clear, I mean the cost to the buyer, not the builder. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] pyre@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago* (1 child) I think the poster is going by the mistaken assumption that there isn't enough housing so they're looking for incentives to increase supply. which is not the issue. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] untakenusername@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) If you wanted bread to be cheaper, you would increase the supply of bread. If you want homes to be cheaper, increase the amount of homes. It might not be the issue at hand, but it definitely is a valid solution. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] pyre@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) corporations are not hoarding bread so they can rent them at obscene rates. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] untakenusername@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) Ideally, if one company charged too much for rent, the person living there could move to another place owned by a different company that would charge cheaper rent, in an effort to take business from the first company. The issue arrives when monopolies control the majority of homes, but those monopolies can be broken much more easily if the cost of buying homes went down (from an increased supply of them) and the barrier to entry of new homeowners who want to rent went down. That would increase competition and would eliminate these monopolies. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] pyre@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago unfortunately in reality that doesn't happen in the market. you can force it though. the government can she should build as many houses as necessary, relatively high quality and super affordable if not free, especially since there's no profit motive. make the houses owned by corporations pointless to the point that they're forced to compete with a non-profit housing entity funded by the public. and if they don't do a good job just forcibly take them. housing must be a right and we should treat it as such. permalink fedilink source parent [–] untakenusername@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) if you make more homes, then the value of each home individually would drop. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] slaveOne@reddthat.com 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) That's not how it works in reality, unfortunately. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] untakenusername@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago How so? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] pyre@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago* (1 child) I think the poster is going by the mistaken assumption that there isn't enough housing so they're looking for incentives to increase supply. which is not the issue. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] untakenusername@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) If you wanted bread to be cheaper, you would increase the supply of bread. If you want homes to be cheaper, increase the amount of homes. It might not be the issue at hand, but it definitely is a valid solution. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] pyre@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) corporations are not hoarding bread so they can rent them at obscene rates. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] untakenusername@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) Ideally, if one company charged too much for rent, the person living there could move to another place owned by a different company that would charge cheaper rent, in an effort to take business from the first company. The issue arrives when monopolies control the majority of homes, but those monopolies can be broken much more easily if the cost of buying homes went down (from an increased supply of them) and the barrier to entry of new homeowners who want to rent went down. That would increase competition and would eliminate these monopolies. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] pyre@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago unfortunately in reality that doesn't happen in the market. you can force it though. the government can she should build as many houses as necessary, relatively high quality and super affordable if not free, especially since there's no profit motive. make the houses owned by corporations pointless to the point that they're forced to compete with a non-profit housing entity funded by the public. and if they don't do a good job just forcibly take them. housing must be a right and we should treat it as such. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] untakenusername@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) If you wanted bread to be cheaper, you would increase the supply of bread. If you want homes to be cheaper, increase the amount of homes. It might not be the issue at hand, but it definitely is a valid solution. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] pyre@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) corporations are not hoarding bread so they can rent them at obscene rates. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] untakenusername@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) Ideally, if one company charged too much for rent, the person living there could move to another place owned by a different company that would charge cheaper rent, in an effort to take business from the first company. The issue arrives when monopolies control the majority of homes, but those monopolies can be broken much more easily if the cost of buying homes went down (from an increased supply of them) and the barrier to entry of new homeowners who want to rent went down. That would increase competition and would eliminate these monopolies. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] pyre@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago unfortunately in reality that doesn't happen in the market. you can force it though. the government can she should build as many houses as necessary, relatively high quality and super affordable if not free, especially since there's no profit motive. make the houses owned by corporations pointless to the point that they're forced to compete with a non-profit housing entity funded by the public. and if they don't do a good job just forcibly take them. housing must be a right and we should treat it as such. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] pyre@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) corporations are not hoarding bread so they can rent them at obscene rates. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] untakenusername@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) Ideally, if one company charged too much for rent, the person living there could move to another place owned by a different company that would charge cheaper rent, in an effort to take business from the first company. The issue arrives when monopolies control the majority of homes, but those monopolies can be broken much more easily if the cost of buying homes went down (from an increased supply of them) and the barrier to entry of new homeowners who want to rent went down. That would increase competition and would eliminate these monopolies. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] pyre@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago unfortunately in reality that doesn't happen in the market. you can force it though. the government can she should build as many houses as necessary, relatively high quality and super affordable if not free, especially since there's no profit motive. make the houses owned by corporations pointless to the point that they're forced to compete with a non-profit housing entity funded by the public. and if they don't do a good job just forcibly take them. housing must be a right and we should treat it as such. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] untakenusername@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) Ideally, if one company charged too much for rent, the person living there could move to another place owned by a different company that would charge cheaper rent, in an effort to take business from the first company. The issue arrives when monopolies control the majority of homes, but those monopolies can be broken much more easily if the cost of buying homes went down (from an increased supply of them) and the barrier to entry of new homeowners who want to rent went down. That would increase competition and would eliminate these monopolies. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] pyre@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago unfortunately in reality that doesn't happen in the market. you can force it though. the government can she should build as many houses as necessary, relatively high quality and super affordable if not free, especially since there's no profit motive. make the houses owned by corporations pointless to the point that they're forced to compete with a non-profit housing entity funded by the public. and if they don't do a good job just forcibly take them. housing must be a right and we should treat it as such. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] pyre@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago unfortunately in reality that doesn't happen in the market. you can force it though. the government can she should build as many houses as necessary, relatively high quality and super affordable if not free, especially since there's no profit motive. make the houses owned by corporations pointless to the point that they're forced to compete with a non-profit housing entity funded by the public. and if they don't do a good job just forcibly take them. housing must be a right and we should treat it as such. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] untakenusername@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) if you make more homes, then the value of each home individually would drop. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] slaveOne@reddthat.com 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) That's not how it works in reality, unfortunately. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] untakenusername@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago How so? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] slaveOne@reddthat.com 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) That's not how it works in reality, unfortunately. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] untakenusername@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago How so? permalink fedilink source parent