Making money at interest available isnt an answer it's a bandaid. You're also incorrect, I don't have time to go find stats and numbers but I can assure you anybody in either of our countries who works full time minumum wage or even be generous and say average wage, still cannot afford to own.

someone who works minimum wage likely doesn't have the financial acumen to own a home. they're the type of person who should mail a check once a month and call someone when something looks off.

also they're just sitting ducks in the automated economy and would be defaulting on said loans in a few years anyways.

if you ban landlords and make them sell off all "family homes" you'd just have market collapses and they'd also have to kick people out of rentals on leases who cant afford to buy the homes they rent. or do you also force them to sell the homes they paid, for example, 100k$ for for 50k$?

Landlords represent the initial capital to purchase the property. Without their theoretical existence, the property would not have been built.

Both of our governments have forced entire communities to sell and move to make room for big business but we can't do it to help families own homes?

Sure, under our current economic system. Usually the argument I was describing comes as part of a larger pitch for socialism.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jan 14 2020 03:40pm

I mean...I can seriously get behind some collectivism policies

my momma always told me two wrongs dont make a right.

but you're dodging my question.

let me lay it out specifically. situation:

-land lord owns 10 "family homes"
-land lord paid 100k$ each for them
-you make a law saying no land lord can own more than 1 "family home"
-land lord has 10 families living in his 10 homes
-land lord is forced to put all 10 homes on the open housing market
-you foresee this and add a line to the law requiring that land lord offers to sell to renters before putting it on the open market
-5 families elect to buy the homes they live in, landlord still has 5 houses.
-5 families must now be evicted due to your law.
-5 families can't afford to buy a home, due to credit, savings, or other factors
-5 families must now, on zero notice, find housing in an apartment complex. because your law makes it illegal for someone to rent them a house.

this is what happens in reality when you apply stats, logic, and more thought than "lets do it for the families maaaaaaaaaan."

or alternatively, no one buys almost any of the houses, they sit on the market, but people cant rent them by law, whole areas fall to shit, housing markets crash, banks take bailouts because your law caused this, etc.

sometimes it pays to think with more than your heart.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Jan 14 2020 03:45pm

You're expecting me to have every specific rule and detail worked out over a hypothetical situation. How much more ridiculous can we make this argument?

Although I am enjoying it, you are well spoken.

This post was edited by Hecht55 on Jan 14 2020 03:46pm

generally i would expect someone to have even a basic plan for how to back up a claim such as "owning more than one house should be illegal", yes. or alternatively you could piggie back on the work i just did laying out a plan for you and maybe say what you like or dont like, what you'd change or keep.

or is life just one thought experiment for you? no wonder u make min wage and cant afford a house.



thank you.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Jan 14 2020 03:48pm

What I imagine would work in a forced buyout scenario, which is not what I would actually recommend. Would be that a level of governemnt would buy the property at market value, other details would have to be arranged for x years of ownership and variables like money invested. Essentially the government would buy the properties and then other arrangements would have to be made to then get them sold.


Whatvwe should do with lower end residential property in the event where people buy multiple properties is limit the allowed income generated from those additional properties. It makes total sense to expect the rental income to pay for the operation of the property. People shouldn't be profiting off low end property. Those cheap places are only being rented because folks can't save enough money down to buy the POS low end housing to begin with.

That's all I have time think and get to you on jsp.

I have my own POS low end asbestos filled house to fix and pay for lol

This post was edited by Hecht55 on Jan 14 2020 03:55pm