868
'Renters Are Struggling': Economists Back Tenant-Led Push for Federal Rent Control (www.commondreams.org)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/news@lemmy.world
258 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 118 points 3 years ago (4 children)

Don’t allow companies to own residential properties.. it’s that simple..

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 26 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    And non US citizens.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    As a US citizen living in another country and trying to buy a house, you want me to have to change my citizenship to do this? 0.o I've lived in Japan for the better part of a decade and am trying to buy a property where, hopefully, my wife and I can live for the rest of our lives. Having to become a citizen in Japan (which does not allow other citizenships except in some very specific cases) is a non-starter for me. I need to be able to freely enter and leave the US in case my family have any issues. Why should I be fucked like this?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 19 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    They probably mean non-residents instead of non-citizens. Would make more sense that way at least.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    I mean, housing issues and challenges in Japan are likely different than in the US.

    If Japanese law required you to be a Japanese citizen in order to buy a home, then yeah, I'd expect you to become a citizen to get a home.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    I just happen to live in Japan, but you can reverse the countries in my example if it helps. If I were a Japanese citizen living in the US almost 10 years and wanting to just buy a home for my family, I think it's unreasonable to have to give up Japanese citizenship just to get a house in the US. Using my example, I would not give up JP citizenship because I have aging family I need to have unlimited access to in Japan.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)

    I'll be honest, I don't think it's unreasonable to need to go through some form of certification to purchase residential housing.

    To use US terms, as those are what I'm familiar with, a greencard would be sufficient, since it would allow you to legally live and work in the country.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)

    I would say "valid status of residence/visa" (greencard/permanent residence can be super long processes of over a decade), but yeah that makes sense to me.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)

    Just a visa would be too low of a bar, imo. Show you're a permanent resident and planning to stay here.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)

    So if that process takes a decade or more the person can just... go fuck themselves despite any intention of permanently living somewhere? This is especially rough on people who move mid-life. I also don't know if the US has an upper age on mortgages which could basically keep people out of home ownership which can also keep them in a position of less stability.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)

    Young people can't own homes now because we have a lot of corporations and foreign ownership buying them to either rent at exorbitant costs or leave vacant as investments. I don't really care about the hypothetical person who might come over here at some point maybe pinkee swear when folks here are having issues now.

    Also, I confirmed with someone who does mortgages that there isn't an upper age limit on getting a mortgage in the US, so that's not a concern.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)

    I mean, this is just dodging the situation. I'm a hardworking, tax-paying person, but fuck me because some other people are doing bad things? That's not good policy. Stopping people living in the country on valid status paying taxes from buying a place to live is asinine.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)

    According to your comments, you're living and buying property in Japan in order to reside there for the rest of your life, so you're arguing about policies that aren't effecting you and that you're not even a party to.

    I guess you can find someone more in tune with Japan's housing market and issues there to discuss the best practices for Japanese laws.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    I have known people who have gone through the same thing in the US. I also have family in the US still who very much are impacted by the housing situation there.

    This just reeks of "foreigners bad" and possibly racism.

    There are many things that can be done other than banning foreigners who haven't yet achieved greencard status but just want to have a place for themselves and their families to live to still achieve that. I don't think you'll find foreigners are the big issue here, and you already mentioned corporations which are a big issue. Attacking foreigners wanting to buy a house is not OK; that's approaching apartheid-level bullshit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    Who's going to make apartment buildings? Isn't that the best solution towards making more housing, to have compact apartment structures? How do you think those get built?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] -8 points 3 years ago*

    You could make every one an HOA and have it be condos.

    Honestly I don't think outright prohibition of companies owning buildings is good, but there needs to be a better mix of ownable housing units to rentable ones. There also needs to be better anti-trust enforcement so that three companies don't own and price control nearly all of the housing in a city (I think there's maybe six companies in my city that own almost all of the apartment complexes).

    They should mandate that a certain subsection of newly zoned housing be owned by people instead of corporations. It would be a much better, much more competitive market for housing if it were possible to own apartments because you could get small time landlords in those buildings as well as people that own their places outright.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -9 points 3 years ago* (2 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    It is property....for residents....

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 3 years ago (1 child)
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    I supposed we can both find sources to say whether it's commercial or residential. https://www.google.com/search?channel=fen&client=firefox-b-1-d&q=are+apartment+buildings+residential+real+estate

    I guess my question is, what's the point in arguing about this? Are you saying the only housing corporations should own are apartment buildings, the biggest most efficient source of housing for individuals in large cities?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago

    My bad I thought residential prop meant single family homes.

    But I didn't say anything about who should own apparements. My only point was when people refer to residential property that refers typically to single family homes and is likely what op is referring to as well.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    That simply results in shitloads of homeless people

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] -32 points 3 years ago (4 children)

    That is a bad idea as owning a house isn't right for everyone.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 39 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

    While that may be, companies should not be able to have a stronghold on what should be considered a basic human need. Housing is already in pretty short supply, and it’s worsened by the fact that these companies buy a considerable chunk of this short supply and then turn the purchased properties into rentals.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -15 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    "buying one home and turning it into 4 home reduces the amount of homes" and other fun takes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    “Buying a house and renting it out to families that were wanting to buy it outright in the first place” FTFY

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    “Buying one home and charging 4x as much for it” is the actual problem, but I suppose you have your head in the sand by default when the large boot of capitalism is on your neck.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 29 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    The idea being proposed here doesn't outlaw renting, only corporate ownership of residential property. It means that the people you're renting from are human beings who will eventually die and either be estate taxed or the house will be sold, rather than a corporation who owns your property until they go bankrupt or until the sun explodes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 3 years ago*

    Bingo. A lot of current problems get better by:

    A) 100% death tax on all money over 100,000,000.00 at time of death.

    B) Closing loopholes that allow hiding that kind of money in unnecessary corporate assets or non-charitable trusts.

    C) Cracking down on what qualifies as a charitable trust. Want to leave that money to trust that makes the world better, better have numbers to prove it or it gets disolved automatically into other more effective charities.

    D) Automatically splitting every corpportation the moment it crosses a reasonable value threshold.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 3 years ago* (2 children)

    Fuck you you shouldn't own a goddamn thing with that mentality.

    You bootlickers are the reason shit is bad and was always bad.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] -14 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    Solid intelligence response there

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •