904
submitted 11 months ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] nature_man@lemmy.world 129 points 11 months ago

Probably a controversial opinion but companies should not be able to own residential real estate at all, the reason most people cant get a house is because big companies are buying them up with limitless sums of money so they can rent them out infinitely, its not a free market when the big company will pay 20% over your entire life savings just to make sure you don't own anything.

[-] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 22 points 11 months ago

Not just limitless sums, companies are borrowing at very low interest rates and skyrocketing real estate prices with free money. Consequelty also causing mass inflation. So you're paying for them owning houses.

[-] AceFuzzLord@lemm.ee 17 points 11 months ago

Absolutely nothing controversial about the truth. In fact, I'd say it's the exact opposite of controversial, at least in this case.

[-] ComradePorkRoll@lemmy.world 16 points 11 months ago

Controversial would be, "if the government won't stop corporations from buying up single family homes, we should do it ourselves by any means necessary." That's controversial.

[-] guacupado@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

Controversial but true.

[-] notannpc@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago

Not controversial at all. The world would be a better place if residential real estate “investment” didn’t exist.

[-] noyou@lemm.ee 13 points 11 months ago

Yeah no this isn't controversial. Private landlords serve no purpose in society. You just pay them their mortgage for the privilege of living in their house. It's ridiculous.

[-] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

%100 no brainer

[-] tmyakal@lemm.ee 5 points 11 months ago

I agree in the case of single-family homes. Even in cases of 3 or 4 unit buildings. But how do you propose full-on complexes get run if not by a company? Very few individuals have the capital to buy a 50-unit building, and honestly, the US needs more dense urban housing to help reduce our impact on climate.

[-] LostWon@lemmy.ca 11 points 11 months ago

Easy. Non-profit co-ops, ideally as part of land trusts. They keep prices reasonable, give all community members a say, and the people who are lucky enough to live in them love them.

[-] thenightisdark@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

My opinion that would be just like asking who would own the streets you use to get to it.

We don't wonder how that really expensive bridge gets owned... Sometimes it's due to tolls but not always.

[-] 31337@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 months ago

Cooperative-like legal structures and public housing are viable options.

[-] noxy@yiffit.net 4 points 11 months ago

Condos. (for non-Americans, this means "apartments except owner-occupied, or at least individually owned and then rented out"

I lived in a 200+ unit condo building. Owned my unit and some proportion of the common stuff and had voting rights and such in the HOA.

this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2023
904 points (98.7% liked)

News

23259 readers
3009 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS