- 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
re: What should be done about investors buying up homes?
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:48 am to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:48 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
This was covered in the post you replied to. Government being left out means government being left out.
I just don’t think that’s realistic anymore. It’s about as realistic as reducing government spending.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:48 am to Indefatigable
quote:
Truth. Forcing entities to sell their property is not the way.
It would also cause an 08 level catastrophe unless done over maybe a 10 year span
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:50 am to 4cubbies
quote:
I just don’t think that’s realistic anymore.
Well nobody would confuse you with a libertarian, so that's not shocking
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:53 am to MadQfrog
Well I’m going to continue to do it as long as it makes financial sense.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:54 am to TrueTiger
I guess no one wants to incentivize traditional families.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:56 am to MadQfrog
The federal government should have absolutely nothing to do with this.
This is a local issue. And there is nothing preventing local governments from restricting corporate home ownership.
This is a local issue. And there is nothing preventing local governments from restricting corporate home ownership.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:58 am to Robin Masters
to be able to finance a house with any type of loan you have to have a resident alien card. no way around that. if illegals are buying homes its cash.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 10:10 am to SlowFlowPro
But, we already set the precedent with 2008. We'll end up holding our noses and bailing out the Blackrocks of the world because they will claim that not doing so would be worse because the virus there will spread to the greater market. So we have to make them bigger or worse things will happen.....and the taxpayer will underwrite it
Posted on 5/20/24 at 10:14 am to MadQfrog
IMO should be a ban or moratorium at the very least on non-U.S. citizens and foreign corporations buying homes and there should at the very least be a limit on how many single family homes an American corporation can buy.
This shite combined with stagnant wages and inflation is robbing Americans of the American Dream.
This shite combined with stagnant wages and inflation is robbing Americans of the American Dream.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 10:16 am to MadQfrog
quote:
if younger people can’t buy homes because of jacked up prices
What is the correct price for a house in this market?
Posted on 5/20/24 at 10:21 am to LegalEazyE
quote:
IMO should be a ban or moratorium at the very least on non-U.S. citizens and foreign corporations buying homes
On a side note, fedgov is trying to crack down on foreign-owned companies meddling in our economy, potentially to regulate this very act, and people on here melted about the very easy additional information necessary for returns. So, good luck with that
Posted on 5/20/24 at 10:21 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Yes. When the market flips, the institutional investors will be exponentially screwed.
ETA: kind of like the Airbnb bubble popping
That's a bit of apples and oranges though. AirBnB was almost exclusively temporary/vacation rentals (nights, weekends, a week or two), not permanent/semi-permanent rentals where people lived. Also, I don't think the majority of AirBnB rentals were large real estate companies managing thousands of permanent, but private individuals with single to multiple properties.
If you've got a Blackrock (or similar) company owning thousands of units in an area, they pretty much have a monopoly in that area. If the area starts going downhill, they can just flip them to Section 8 and hold them indefinitely (as long as Uncle Sam is footing the bill). Thus you have market forces being thwarted by government's social welfare intervention.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 10:24 am to SlowFlowPro
Governments all over the world have tried to regulate residential housing into being more affordable. It doesn't work. The fantasy of doing nothing is the solution but our population won't allow it.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 10:27 am to Bard
quote:
AirBnB was almost exclusively temporary/vacation rentals (nights, weekends, a week or two), not permanent/semi-permanent rentals where people lived. Also, I don't think the majority of AirBnB rentals were large real estate companies managing thousands of permanent, but private individuals with single to multiple properties.
Everything you just said was wrong. AirBnb started off that way, but institutional investors quickly caught on. Multi-national real-estate conglomerates began systematically buying up entire neighborhoods of touristy cities to convert inti airbnbs, pricing out and displacing residents. This has led to MANY cities that used ti have tourists and residents becoming completely hollowed out with their cores completely bereft of full-time residents.
The entirety of the housing crisis right now could be eliminated by just fixing ONE of the three causes:
1. Bad zoning preventing midrise urban infill development.
2. Reversing the flood of illegal immigrants and false asylum seekers, even if just deporting the ones who entered under the current president.
3. Outlawing corporate ownership of single family homes.
Our entire housing shortage is manufactured by globalist elites in a systematic effort to destroy the middle class.
This post was edited on 5/20/24 at 10:32 am
Posted on 5/20/24 at 10:28 am to Bard
quote:
That's a bit of apples and oranges though. AirBnB was almost exclusively temporary/vacation rentals (nights, weekends, a week or two), not permanent/semi-permanent rentals where people lived.
What's the difference? Both were corporate efforts to prevent an individual/family from using that property as a home, instead relying on rentals.
The type of rental/commercial activity is largely irrelevant.
quote:
Also, I don't think the majority of AirBnB rentals were large real estate companies managing thousands of permanent, but private individuals with single to multiple properties.
Again, how will a bubble popping change things, especially compared to individuals/families seeking non-commercial use of the same properties in the same markets?
quote:
If the area starts going downhill, they can just flip them to Section 8 and hold them indefinitely
This won't work in areas where they jacked the prices up. They will still have to pay the loans/financing they rely upon to operate and the loss of revenue (going from private to Section 8) will crush them. So they'll be upside down, with a declining asset, and decreased revenue.
Or, if it's a fund without debt/leverage somehow, they're going to have negative returns for years. How is that going to be sustainable? How long can most of these funds hold out?
Blackrock is one thing, but last I heard, they had already read the tea leaves and stopped investing in this area.
quote:
Thus you have market forces being thwarted by government's social welfare intervention.
I'm not a fan of Section 8, obviously.
However, it's not typically so easy to flip that switch, especially on the massive scale you're discussing. Yeah it's a boogeyman, but in practicality it's going to be impossible across the board. The areas that are going to be hit the hardest, have the most expensive property, and only a % of those properties (given basic demo/population) can even be Section 8.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 10:30 am to wutangfinancial
quote:
Governments all over the world have tried to regulate residential housing into being more affordable. It doesn't work. The fantasy of doing nothing is the solution but our population won't allow it.
Yeah the problem is we (as in the population) wants both poles.
We want affordable housing for one group, but we don't want other groups to lose a lot of value their biggest personal investment.
The issues with desirable areas and shithole areas compounds this.
There's also the impact on retirement/investment accounts. Yeah we hit institutional investors hard, and then our retirement takes a big haircut accordingly.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 10:31 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Yes. When the market flips, the institutional investors will be exponentially screwed.
I agree but the counterargument is that there is no promise the market will flip and potential home buyers miss out on years of equity-building opportunity waiting on a market flip that might never happen.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 10:33 am to LSUnation78
quote:
Homes and farm land.
Two things that should only be owned by an entity who can occupy/work them.
Nah, frick that.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 10:34 am to stout
quote:
I agree but the counterargument is that there is no promise the market will flip and potential home buyers miss out on years of equity-building opportunity waiting on a market flip that might never happen.
The market has to eventually flip. Not just talking as of in terms of a bubble, but prices have to go up and down.
And I'm not speaking about this in terms of private individuals making the decision, just the impact on the big corporate RE ventures.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 10:35 am to BuckyCheese
quote:
This is a local issue.
Local by municipality or by state?
I wouldn't count on the state of LA to make the correct decision here.
AirBNBs could be zoned out easily by cities, though. That alone would create inventory. Also, in Calcasieu Parish a firm named Kairos living has bought up several DSLD homes in various neighborhoods in Sulphur, LC, and Moss Bluff. The city or police jury could easily have a clause preventing this action before they approve any new developments.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News