What about banks, real-estate, and just random big companies?
this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2023
1799 points (99.3% liked)
politics
20415 readers
3132 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
There are companies that are crowd funding buying homes too, where the person is the investor and earns dividends on it. It's getting insane.
load more comments
(9 replies)
I thought the same. Is there data somewhere to suggest hedge funds specifically own more than the others?
Hedge funds have been disproportionate buyers of single-family homes over the last few years.
Traditionally, real estate investment funds didn't own single family homes to rent. Most companies with single family home exposure were builders.
There's still a ton of other multi-family and apartment REITs out there, but I believe they're not being targetting both because they've existed for a long while and also because usually a person looking for a family home doesn't buy the entire apartment building.
Here's a source with some more info: https://www.cnbc.com/2023/02/21/how-wall-street-bought-single-family-homes-and-put-them-up-for-rent.html
load more comments
(1 replies)
Banks usually own them only for the time they're for sale after being seized from an owner that defaulted on their payment, no?
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Now ban non hotel licensed entities from renting living spaces for less than a month
Fuck that Air BnB shit
Air bnb, flippers, Zillow, and 0% fed funds rate inflated the housing market destroying young peoples' dream of home ownership.
Good, now find a way to make the Republicans let it pass.
So you say you're a dreamer. Well you're not the only one. ---would be great if people could get into a 1200sf starter home for under 500k in my area.
If they just ban some human rights I'm sure they'll come around.
load more comments
(2 replies)
For every single-family home a hedge fund owns over a certain limit each year, it would be subject to a tax penalty, the revenues from which would be used for down payment assistance programs for those seeking to buy their first home from a hedge fund.
Sounds like even if this gets passed, whatever penalties get assessed are just going right back to the hedge funds anyway? And it's a 10-year plan... Kinda sounds like a whole lotta nothing. Disappointing.
They need to change the property tax system to tax non occupant owners a much higher rate and lower the rates for owner occupants. Add a big penalty on top of that for vacant non occupant owned houses. Punish them for hoarding vacant houses to artificially inflate prices.
So the goal is to push up rents relative to ownership? Why is it that the solution to the problems of capitalism always seems to be shifting around how poor people give money to rich people?
Just flat out say no corporation is allowed to have ownership or controlling interest in any SFH. Period. No incentives. You have a few years to divest until the property is auctioned off.
It's not a perfect solution. Maybe not the best. But I'm so tired of pretending all we can do is basically nothing.
Capitalism is wonderful when everyone is on similar footing, but the natural result is to concentrate wealth which breaks the system. I don't hate capitalism, but we are too far into the late-stage broken part and we need a way to reset that ideally doesn't involve violent revolt. Eventually people get sick of living under the boot of a situation created by their ancestors and which they've received nothing beneficial from. Concentrated wealth and generational wealth needs to go away. People like Musk and Trump are only problems because they were born to more wealth than most people will ever know.
Get rid of that shit and redistribute their wealth to the people and that will fix so many of our problems.
load more comments
(21 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
I want to believe....but I can't. I'm glad someone put the bill out there. But there is no way this gets bipartisan support or gets pushed through in any way. It will die in the halls of our inept, depraved, corrupt government.
The chance of any bill passing is about 30% regardless of what level of public support it has.
The same is not true when you compare the chances to the support the rich have for a bill. When the rich support a bill its far more likely to pass. When the rich oppose a bill, it is far more likely to fail.
So it will be no surprise when this bill unfortunately fails.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Supreme court: preventing hedge funds from owning single-family homes infringes on their free speech to dictate what you have to pay to not be homeless.
This exact opinion coming in 2024 if this bill somehow passes.
Bonus points if communism gets brought up in the process.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(5 replies)
I hope to god this passes.
More than likely it’s a pander to voters, but if it works and he doesn’t follow up- we’re still better off.
load more comments
(2 replies)
I can't express how excited this makes me.
I have been saying for years now that regulation is the only cure for the housing crisis, and resulting homeless crisis.
I wrote my Congresswoman about this a while back.
Fuck. Yes.
I wouldnt get too excited. The hedge funds will just start an LLC or s corps or some other legal loop hole and continue forward doing what they do.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
This is one of those bills that gets proposed just for the attack ads.
“Republican Senator Dickweed WANTS hedge funds to own your home.”
Dirty but effective pool, I’m glad Dems aren’t still “going high.”
load more comments
(8 replies)
Homes should be for living, not profit making.
Housing can be affordable or an investment, not both.
load more comments
(8 replies)
Oh, only 40+ years too late, thanks.
The best time to plant trees is 50 years ago. The second best time to plant trees is right now.
load more comments
(1 replies)
There's probably some loophole about how they can't do it as a hedge fund but a shrub fund is just fine.
Hedge funds will only own many small investment firms, and those little firms own the houses.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Not going anywhere and they know it. Pretty much exists for grandstanding purposes in the 24 election.
Messaging is still important, and showing voters that you'll actually vote for something when Republicans vote it down. If we dismissed all statements that had no political feasibility there'd be a number of progressive politicians who'd barely talk.
And like I said, that's okay! It isn't a dig at Progressives. It's actually exactly what they need to do to pull the party left.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(8 replies)
Wall Street: Lol no.
Great. The selling over a ten year period is a little frustrating because it's a fucking decade, which means ten years on will likely be the soonest any action is taken if they don't.
But I am glad for the ground it gives against the commodification of housing.
Housing is a need, not a commodity. It really shouldn't have to be a transitional period, it is kind of just a switch, but let's see if it actually passes.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Why only single family homes? Why not all the homes?
Not just homes but apartments as well. When you call your landlord...you should get your landlord, not some phone service that doesn't even know where you live.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
For every single-family home a hedge fund owns over a certain limit each year, it would be subject to a tax penalty
Sounds like nobody's forced to sell, and instead this is only going to make those corporate landlords increase rents to make up for this tax penalty.
It does force selling according to the author.
"The legislation would require hedge funds to sell off their stock of single-family homes over the next 10 years and would then implement an outright ban."
This is such great politics. It helps america and who ever wants to side with hedge funds? I can't wait to see the strange justifications people who are against this will say
load more comments
(3 replies)
It's bill, meaning it is still in the drafting stage. The question is if it will ever be passed as a law and not just to pay lip service.
view more: next ›