Opinion Easy solution to the housing shortage

[Fedorgasm]

Can't they just progressively tax each house a person (or company) owns?

So your first house has very low taxes, because you need a place to live.

But of you own a second house, it's taxed a little higher. A third house is taxed even more, a 4th house even more than that, and so on.

That way more people can afford a first house but if they want to keep using homes as income properties then at some point it no longer makes economic sense.

You wouldn't have people trying to own 50 houses, nor would you have big corporations buying thousands of homes and driving up the prices.

What would be the drawback?

 

[Prefect]

Politicians are given money by people involved in real estate. A progressive anything would fix most systems.

 

[TheNinja]

In theory it makes sense. In reality for a lot of poeple if they own a 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc. house they usually rent it out. They'll just pass along the cost of increased taxes to the renters and make everyone yell even more that the rent is too damn high!

 

[WadeWatts]

or just make a law that does not allow any corporations worth over $100 billion (or insert the number you think is reasonable) to buy residential real estate. I don't think regular entrepreneurs owning 50 to 100 rental properties are the ones fucking up the system.

 

[Zebra Cheeks]

The only drawback is the people contributing the most money to campaigns would be the ones not benefiting

 

[Islam Imamate]

Can't they just progressively tax each house a person (or company) owns?

So your first house has very low taxes, because you need a place to live.

But of you own a second house, it's taxed a little higher. A third house is taxed even more, a 4th house even more than that, and so on.

That way more people can afford a first house but if they want to keep using homes as income properties then at some point it no longer makes economic sense.

You wouldn't have people trying to own 50 houses, nor would you have big corporations buying thousands of homes and driving up the prices.

What would be the drawback?

You guys will think of anything to avoid just letting people build more houses won't you?

 

[Fedorgasm]

You guys will think of anything to avoid just letting people build more houses won't you?

You guys?

Not sure who you're lumping me in with.

Anyway, building more houses won't solve the problem if some giant corporations can simply buy them up.

 

[Fedorgasm]

In theory it makes sense. In reality for a lot of poeple if they own a 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc. house they usually rent it out. They'll just pass along the cost of increased taxes to the renters and make everyone yell even more that the rent is too damn high!

Yeah but people who only own one rental property can charge a much lower rent, whereas people renting out their 99th rental property would have to charge rent so high that they couldn't compete, and would be better off just selling the house.

 

[KeepingItReal]

Can't they just progressively tax each house a person (or company) owns?

So your first house has very low taxes, because you need a place to live.

But of you own a second house, it's taxed a little higher. A third house is taxed even more, a 4th house even more than that, and so on.

That way more people can afford a first house but if they want to keep using homes as income properties then at some point it no longer makes economic sense.

You wouldn't have people trying to own 50 houses, nor would you have big corporations buying thousands of homes and driving up the prices.

What would be the drawback?

The drawback is you have less houses being built. Presumably if someone else could have bought those houses they would have, so whats the issue with an investment company buying it?

 

[Kung Fu Kowboy]

LFG!!!!!!!

 

[Rygu]

LFG!!!!!!!

Reminds me of that city early on in Fallout 3 that I always end up blowing up.

 

[aerius]

You guys will think of anything to avoid just letting people build more houses won't you?

My solution is commie blocks, but we can't have that in Freedomerica.

 

[Seano]

My solution is commie blocks, but we can't have that in Freedomerica.

We just call those projects in the states.

 

[Rygu]

My solution is commie blocks, but we can't have that in Freedomerica.

Look at how happy they look in their commie blocks.

 

[tenniswhiz]

You guys will think of anything to avoid just letting people build more houses won't you?

Once built, the houses just need to be affordable.

 

[Rational Poster]

You already have to pay more taxes on property that isn't your primary residence.

 

[RockyLockridge]

I have a better solution, why not just have a favela in basically every single metropolitan city in north america? a Favela with only cool people and no drugs would be dope

 

[avenue94]

In theory it makes sense. In reality for a lot of poeple if they own a 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc. house they usually rent it out. They'll just pass along the cost of increased taxes to the renters and make everyone yell even more that the rent is too damn high!

Most people don't rent out their second home, it's just empty usually.

 

[Fedorgasm]

You already have to pay more taxes on property that isn't your primary residence.

Yeah but it doesn't keep going up for each house you buy. We need to make it not worth it for corporations to buy 20,000 houses.

 

[Rational Poster]

Yeah but it doesn't keep going up for each house you buy. We need to make it not worth it for corporations to buy 20,000 houses.

But it doesn't make sense for individuals to buy apartments most of the time. Corporations do not own many single family homes compared to privately owned mortgages, they own apartment and condo complexes that most of the time isn't worth the liability of ownership to renters.

I think it's a bit more complicated than corporation own house = bad.