• Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    74
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 month ago

    Neither choice is great. One is evil.

    That 25k quickly becomes “oh, everyone had 25k more so we can charge 25k more”.

    Don’t give rich house builders tax breaks, they’re the ones causing the problem by deliberately not building enough. You’re the fucking government. Build houses yourselves. Rent them through social housing programs.

      • Blackmist@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 month ago

        Yeah, that too.

        The precious “free markets” have had their crack at it, and have shown that they’re not to be trusted to either own or build them. Prices have soared and that’s 100% intentional on their part.

        • Shard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          It was never a free market because of antiquated zoning laws. At very least free market would have driven more dense residential construction because they would have made more return on their buck. We need to allow and even promote medium rise residential zoning in more home scarcity is an issue.

          Land owners be damned, the needs of the many outweigh the greed of the few.

    • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 month ago

      25k is for first time home buyers, not everyone. You can’t have separate prices for first time buyers and the rest of the public, and a seller won’t know how you are financed until after the house is listed anyways.

      This absolutely will help, because if you’d just ask anyone trying to get a home, the down payment is the hardest part to satisfy.

      The only way a house cartel can form like this is for those that own the homes. The builders don’t own the homes, corporations do. Those corporations collude and price fix to create a cartel. Focus on that.

      • ECB@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        The UK had a similar scheme for first time buyers and it’s often cited by economists as one of the biggest things fueling their housing crisis.

        • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Its hard to take that at face value. The UK and the US have a lot of anti consumer perspectives.

          Do you have anything that describes the mechanism?

          Its sort of a similar arguement to food stamps raising food prices right?

          In either case its on the groups abusing a rule that are the problem, not the rule. There can be well worded regulations that minimize abuse, and we can also audit things.

          • ECB@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            Sure, here’s a paper which explores the effects.

            Essentially, housing prices have hugely inflated (in much of the developed world) because demand is much higher than supply. Prices in the real-estate market are generally really reactive to changes in supply or demand because each ‘product’ is unique and limited, as well as being worth a lot of money so there is more pressure to maximize the potential gains.

            This sort of plan increases the resources available to the demand side without increasing the supply side. This drives up prices since there are more potential buyers.

            Anyone who couldn’t buy a house without such a program is being added the the pool of people competing for a limited supply of houses. It won’t increase supply because supply is heavily limited by other factors, most notably zoning.

            It’s unfortunate, because the thought behind such a policy is admirable. It’s trying to make buying a house more fair and more easily achievable for a broad segment of the population that currently is effectively shut out from owning a home.

            • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              The current administration is already doing most of the things regulation wise. Its just not catchy or easy to understand like the down payment assistance part.

              The changes the Biden administration has made and is making will take time, houses can’t be built overnight, but the down payment assistance helps now.

              In my opinion, its only a bad policy if we choose to allow it to be.

    • MrMcGasion@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’ve started to come around on the 25k down payment assistance. It definitely has it’s problems, and there will absolutely be those who gouge because of it. But because it’s specifically down-payment assistance it will still help first time buyers get mortgages on houses they can afford the regular payments on, but don’t have the extra to set aside for a 10% down payment because rent is taking everything they could be setting aside for a down payment. And it’s limited to first time home buyers, with 2 years of on-time rent payments, and says “up to” 25k. Wouldn’t surprise me if it ends up being limited to 10% of the purchase price (which gets you more favorable loan terms).

      • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        My wife and I only own our home because her wealthy dad was willing to front about half of the down payment with an interest-free repayment to him alongside the mortgage. With 25k from the government we’d not have needed that, and we got an acre in California. 25k is huge.

        We’ve only ever had trouble with this mortgage once, and it was trouble we could have managed without help had we just tightened our belts for a while (just don’t go to the ER. Even if you have insurance. Even if you’re dying on the floor and an ex first responder demands you to for your safety: die instead. I am not joking, had it not been for familial help we’d be paying it off for the next 5 years and it would eat almost all of the little savings we’ve finally started managing to build up, so one more bump and we’d lose fucking everything), so it looks like all those “well sure you can afford rent that’s 1.5x the cost of the potential mortgage, but how do we know you can afford it on the job you’ve had for 8 years?” Pricks were wrooooooooooong

    • HasturInYellow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      The builders have made the 16 million empty homes in this country because they were just selling them to corporations. It’s not that they are not hiding enough, it’s that the rich have engulfed the entire pipe with their gluttonous mouths and there is nothing left for the rest of us.

      When will we finally slay the beasts that are killing us?

    • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s not that they aren’t building enough. It’s that they are building big luxury homes because there is a bigger profit margin than making affordable homes.

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      Most builders are already fully booked for work. The one’s that could work faster generally aren’t the ones you want building your house.