- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
What should be done about investors buying up homes?
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:17 am
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:17 am
Pretty interesting WSJ article from yesterday:
LINK
It’s behind a paywall, but they are recommending this:
The Republican / libertarian side of me wants deregulation and hate this idea of government control/ socialism, but do you think government should be hands off in this matter?
Apparently in Atlanta, this is the case:
LINK
I kind of feel this is a problem, if younger people can’t buy homes because of jacked up prices due to less supply, but I hate government involvement in any sense and hate the idea government telling businesses how to operate.
LINK
It’s behind a paywall, but they are recommending this:
quote:
Forcing large investors to sell rental homes and heavily taxing the investors is the wrong approach (“Home-Buying Firms Draw Lawmakers’ Ire,” Page One, April 30). Legislators should instead change the tax code that makes houses so expensive to families.
Lawmakers should eliminate the tax-code provisions that give investors a huge advantage over family buyers.
The Republican / libertarian side of me wants deregulation and hate this idea of government control/ socialism, but do you think government should be hands off in this matter?
Apparently in Atlanta, this is the case:
quote:
Home buyers and renters in metro Atlanta have some giants to slay if they want to succeed in Georgia’s hot housing market. According to researchers at Georgia State University (GSU), three large corporate landlords own more than 19,000 single-family homes in the five core counties of metro Atlanta — and they’re renting those houses out for a big profit.
LINK
I kind of feel this is a problem, if younger people can’t buy homes because of jacked up prices due to less supply, but I hate government involvement in any sense and hate the idea government telling businesses how to operate.
This post was edited on 5/20/24 at 9:18 am
33
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:20 am to MadQfrog
Homes and farm land.
Two things that should only be owned by an entity who can occupy/work them.
Two things that should only be owned by an entity who can occupy/work them.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:21 am to MadQfrog
quote:
I kind of feel this is a problem
Its been a problem for years, its just now showing full effect. People locally screamed about this 5 years ago, and they were right.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:22 am to MadQfrog
Maybe the 30MM+ poor people streaming across the border every few years has reduced the supply of affordable housing in this country which, if you follow the laws of basic economics, caused prices to rise dramatically?
This post was edited on 5/20/24 at 9:29 am
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:24 am to MadQfrog
Don't bail them out when it goes belly up as the market shifts.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:24 am to MadQfrog
How about if you are male/female (the real kind) married couple under 40 your entire mortgage is deductible, with a million $ cap.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:27 am to MadQfrog
quote:
The Republican / libertarian side of me wants deregulation and hate this idea of government control/ socialism, but do you think government should be hands off in this matter?
quote:
but I hate government involvement in any sense and hate the idea government telling businesses how to operate.
So do you think government should just leave it alone and let things continue to play out?
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:30 am to MadQfrog
Whether I think the government should or should not be involved, when I bought my house, I put in offers on 3 or 4 before I finally bought one. Every house that my offer wasn’t accepted was because of a company out of Baton Rouge coming in with cash.
I believe the push for this generation to stay on the go, can up and move, plus can’t actually buy a house is what the market wants.
Times have changed from the idea you move, buy a house, and raise a family. Those ideals are disappearing.
I believe the push for this generation to stay on the go, can up and move, plus can’t actually buy a house is what the market wants.
Times have changed from the idea you move, buy a house, and raise a family. Those ideals are disappearing.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:33 am to MadQfrog
quote:
but I hate government involvement in any sense
Its actually cronyism.
Let a motel try that in a neighborhood and they'll get turned down by zoning.
Investors are being favored over residents.
If someone lives in the home and rents out a room, I dont have issues with it.
This post was edited on 5/20/24 at 9:35 am
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:35 am to LSUnation78
quote:frick that. If i want to have farm land and keep it fallow, thats my choice. If I want to buy three homes and only live in one, thats my choice.
Two things that should only be owned by an entity who can occupy/work them.
Now if you want to limit these investors, change the tax code to disincentivize owning more than X number of homes or limit the number of homes you can claim rental income from to X. This would put a cap on it
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:37 am to MadQfrog
It's been going on for a long time
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:39 am to 4cubbies
quote:
So do you think government should just leave it alone and let things continue to play out?
Yes. When the market flips, the institutional investors will be exponentially screwed.
ETA: kind of like the Airbnb bubble popping
This post was edited on 5/20/24 at 9:40 am
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:41 am to MadQfrog
We are generally averse to government regulation because its generally negative but sometimes a properly functioning society has to make rules for the betterment of that society. A huge corporation should not own a vast portfolio of residential property. There are other ways to make money than at the expense of your population
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:43 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Yes. When the market flips, the institutional investors will be exponentially screwed.
Unless they are too big to fail.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:43 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Yes. When the market flips, the institutional investors will be exponentially screwed. ETA: kind of like the Airbnb bubble popping
Until the people you vote for bail them out
Cant have boomers feeling the slightest squeeze
This post was edited on 5/20/24 at 9:45 am
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:44 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
the institutional investors will be exponentially screwed.
I'd put good money that they will get bailed out.
Thats what we do today.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:45 am to MadQfrog
quote:
Forcing large investors to sell rental homes and heavily taxing the investors is the wrong approach (“Home-Buying Firms Draw Lawmakers’ Ire,” Page One, April 30). Legislators should instead change the tax code that makes houses so expensive to families.
Lawmakers should eliminate the tax-code provisions that give investors a huge advantage over family buyers.
Truth.
Forcing entities to sell their property is not the way.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:46 am to 4cubbies
quote:
Unless they are too big to fail.
This was covered in the post you replied to. Government being left out means government being left out.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:47 am to scottydoesntknow
quote:
Until the people you vote for bail them out
Libertarians aren't doing that.
Also, back to my initial comment ITT:
quote:
Don't bail them out when it goes belly up as the market shifts.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:47 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
I'd put good money that they will get bailed out.
Back to my initial comment:
quote:
Don't bail them out when it goes belly up as the market shifts.
Page 1 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News