Economy The great housing market crash of 2022

[Halifax]

I feel as though onerous zoning regulations are the real reason for the housing crisis. People with capital are of course well poised to take advantage of this situation by being able to put down the capital for a mortgage only to rent the house itself but if there was sufficient stock that wouldn't matter much would it?

Cities need to end single family zoning and get rid of set backs and mandatory parking minimums to allow for more efficient land use and incentivize developers to build high and medium density housing in mixed use developments across the city and suburbs.

And say "fuck airbnb's" and regulate them out of existence. At least in halifax

 

[Corona]

Been saving up for a few years, looking at getting something next year, hopefully the market is in a good place to buy by then. That way I can go full krusty and say that the pandemic moved me.. TO A BIGGER HOUSE!

 

[ElKarlo]

my colleagues son was fired at oracle

Oracle announced a billion dollars worth of savings via layoffs. So, yeah it’s starting.

 

[So Fresh]

I have a feeling some people here just wanna see the housing market crash so they can say I told you so and not look like a fool

 

[CantCucktheTuck]

I have a feeling some people here just wanna see the housing market crash so they can say I told you so and not look like a fool

The good news is all we have to do is change the definition of foreclosure.

 

[aerius]

And say "fuck airbnb's" and regulate them out of existence. At least in halifax

Commercial tax rates, insurance rates, and handicap access requirements will do it.
Makes airbnb an economical dead duck.

 

[So Fresh]

The good news is all we have to do is change the definition of foreclosure.

You’re still on that. That thread really got you good. I told that TS he should’ve changed the name of the thread, now all you dummies are all riled up.

“tHeY chAngEd ThE dEfiNitIon”

 

[Yehudim]

I feel as though onerous zoning regulations are the real reason for the housing crisis. People with capital are of course well poised to take advantage of this situation by being able to put down the capital for a mortgage only to rent the house itself but if there was sufficient stock that wouldn't matter much would it?

Cities need to end single family zoning and get rid of set backs and mandatory parking minimums to allow for more efficient land use and incentivize developers to build high and medium density housing in mixed use developments across the city and suburbs.

Huge contributor but high(er) housing prices was inevitable due to huge forces in the world like greater urbanization and aging demographics meaning older, richer people being able to use their large incomes to buy scarce housing.

Easing up on regulations and a change in the culture of some vast areas of the US are our only chances of fighting high housing prices. What I mean by culture is a lot of opposition to building new housing in certain areas for an abundance of reasons. Think of places in California and Colorado where you have these progressives who look at Texas and Georgia in horror because they don’t like how urban sprawl looks. In other cases it’s cynical and just a way for homeowners to inflate the prices of their beautiful coastal California or charming mountainside homes in colorado.

 

[chardog]

That’s nowhere near what I’m talking about. I’m talking about the people paying $1400 a month to rent, and can’t find a home for a $1200 a month mortgage because they’re all being owned and leased out.

The person in your example should be renting an apartment or condo while they straighten out their life.

the question is are they looking? I dont know the stats, but in my area, the rent prices are ridiculous, 3700-4500, my cousin is renting out her home for 4500 nearby (under 2000sq ft), and people are lining up, we probably have to build upwards with the popularity of this area, however when it comes to multi-unit complexes, you run into an institution that owns those...... is that any better? probably not.

 

[chardog]

I feel as though onerous zoning regulations are the real reason for the housing crisis. People with capital are of course well poised to take advantage of this situation by being able to put down the capital for a mortgage only to rent the house itself but if there was sufficient stock that wouldn't matter much would it?

Cities need to end single family zoning and get rid of set backs and mandatory parking minimums to allow for more efficient land use and incentivize developers to build high and medium density housing in mixed use developments across the city and suburbs.

all of california put in the adu law a few years back already, you can turn your garage into a studio, that is a massive law change that will have big implications over the years. Your suburbs will indeed get shittier though, I see it first hand as people are starting to take advantage.

 

[Islam Imamate]

We both see the same problem, but I see the opposite solution.

They need to open up the single family zoning areas. So many places sit empty with commercially zoned “build to suit or lease!” Signs up on them. Towns need to be able to keep expanding. Empty land right on the outskirts of towns everywhere, just let people build some houses on them. Even weird splotches in towns that aren’t parks or anything, just 10-40 acres of empty grass.

building multi family cookie cutter condos only allows for more developers to get rich, while keeping people paying into renting without being able to own anything of their own to build that investment. And then it drives up the cost of actual houses as all that’s being built is units.

edit: also remove the square footage minimum from those zoning regs. We don’t need more 2800 square foot monster for double 100k income families. Let’s get some nice new 1200-1400 square foot homes back for average joes to be able to buy.

Don't agree at all, there's no need for a bunch of cookie cutter single family homes that bankrupt cities and entrench car dependence. I don't get this point about supposedly greedy developers, they're going to make a bunch of money whether its condos, single family houses, or anything in between. Why should they be forced to build single family homes? That's just absurd to me.

The idea that all we'll get are rental units and that this is bad and we're better off with more suburban single family sprawl is completely wrong on so many levels. Adding lots of units to the housing market will bring down the cost of housing. Some people don't care about not paying towards ownership, they just want cheap housing. More dense developments helps ease the supply problem while single family developments, which are much less efficient in their land use, don't add enough stock to significantly lower the price thereby making them unaffordable for young and/or working class families and prone to being snatched up by aspiring landlords.

Btw more dense developments doesn't have to mean condo towers. Why shouldn't a developer be allowed to build a two story multi family unit instead of a single family home on a lot? Why not a four story apartment complex with commercial and office units? These are the kinds of developments that will actually add enough housing supply to bring down exorbitant housing costs, not single family developments which got us into this mess.

And say "fuck airbnb's" and regulate them out of existence. At least in halifax

I understand the frustration with them but to me the fundamental problem is inefficient land use in suburbs which leads to low housing stock. The Air BNB issue is a symptom, not a cause.

 

[HockeyBjj]

Why shouldn't a developer be allowed to build a two story multi family unit instead of a single family home on a lot?

Because individuals own their single family home and benefit off the investment. Multi family units are renting, a person pays a subscription fee to live there that's always going up. And they never get to pass down the wealth generated from the housing.

That's my biggest issue

 

[Islam Imamate]

Because individuals own their single family home and benefit off the investment. Multi family units are renting, a person pays a subscription fee to live there that's always going up. And they never get to pass down the wealth generated from the housing.

That's my biggest issue

First off, people can in a sense own their apartments through leaseholds. Second, to me that is a terrible reason to restrict the supply of more housing stock. Not everyone has to own the dwelling they live in and having more rental units means bringing the price down.

There are still plenty of single family homes out there for those who want to go own one. But banning every other style of housing and reserving most of the land for single family home development which has so many negative externalities is absurd.

I'm not saying people should b prevented from building single family homes. I'm just saying we should allow other types of developments, some of which might be better suited to meeting demand in the housing market.

 

[chardog]

Because individuals own their single family home and benefit off the investment. Multi family units are renting, a person pays a subscription fee to live there that's always going up. And they never get to pass down the wealth generated from the housing.

That's my biggest issue

you can technically own a piece of a multi family home, however it will probably suck living so close to others

on top of that, home ownership has its downfalls

like taxes on top of more taxes and insurance, it's kind of a headache

 

[deadon]

Because individuals own their single family home and benefit off the investment. Multi family units are renting, a person pays a subscription fee to live there that's always going up. And they never get to pass down the wealth generated from the housing.

That's my biggest issue

To add, anyone that has lived in a apartment knows it sux. Our first place was a apartment and I'll never forget it and that was 27 years ago.

There's happiness in having a backyard where kids can play and pets can enjoy also.

I know the people that want everyone stacked on top of each other don't really care about that. But mental health is a thing. Nothing like coming home and sitting by the fire pit looking at the stars with the kids. Roasting marshmallows and telling stories.

 

[HockeyBjj]

you can technically own a piece of a multi family home, however it will probably suck living so close to others

on top of that, home ownership has its downfalls

like taxes on top of more taxes and insurance, it's kind of a headache

How are those downfalls? Anyone renting is already paying their landlord's taxs and insurance, plus a margin on top of that

At least say the downfall of having to deal with appliance failures on your own instead of calling up said landlord

 

[Islam Imamate]

To add, anyone that has lived in a apartment knows it sux. Our first place was a apartment and I'll never forget it and that was 27 years ago.

There's happiness in having a backyard where kids can play and pets can enjoy also.

I know the people that want everyone stacked on top of each other don't really care about that. But mental health is a thing. Nothing like coming home and sitting by the fire pit looking at the stars with the kids. Roasting marshmallows and telling stories.

The thing is its actually your side that is forcing people to buy only a certain type of housing. No one is saying you can't live like that, if you want to and can afford it then that's fine. But why should that be the only form of housing that's allowed to be built? That's the case for most land around cities.

The onus should be on you to justify banning all other forms of housing outside the downtown core.

 

[deadon]

The thing is its actually your side that is forcing people to buy only a certain type of housing. No one is saying you can't live like that, if you want to and can afford it then that's fine. But why should that be the only form of housing that's allowed to be built? That's the case for most land around cities.

The onus should be on you to justify banning all other forms of housing outside the downtown core.

I'm on the outskirts of NV where growth is insane. Everywhere you look its 3 story apartments. How can you charge a EV in a 3 story apartment?

They're building homes here also but lately when I go to town all I see is these apartments. I'm not saying people shouldn't live in them. Some may like that life, I don't. Nothing is holding anyone back from living in them either except they want 2600.00 a month for a 2 bedroom lol.

The housing market will adjust like always. We bought our home for 350k and we had a cash offer of 950k. I've seen it high and I've seen it low. The lows are coming.

 

[jk7707]

Been saving up for a few years, looking at getting something next year, hopefully the market is in a good place to buy by then. That way I can go full krusty and say that the pandemic moved me.. TO A BIGGER HOUSE!

 

[lifelessheap]

The thing is its actually your side that is forcing people to buy only a certain type of housing. No one is saying you can't live like that, if you want to and can afford it then that's fine. But why should that be the only form of housing that's allowed to be built? That's the case for most land around cities.

The onus should be on you to justify banning all other forms of housing outside the downtown core.

I but houses in California for 25+ years... They forced single family homes. Democrats did this. The refused to increase density.

Why are you ignoring this?