I think everyone can agree on this article
Companies that buy single-family homes say their businesses provide renters the opportunity to live in desirable neighborhoods where they otherwise couldn’t afford to buy.
That’s true, because companies buying SFHs make it unaffordable to buy homes in desirable neighborhoods. They are the solution to the problem they created.
That would be true if this situation didn’t exist before the leap in prices.
I missed that gem. Buy having billions, if not trillions to spend they can inflate pricing.
Studies have shown that is bullshit but I disagree. The claim is they only own about 1% of the market and can’t influence it.
I know anecdotal data isn’t always accurate but they seem to focus in the low to mid range. When I was buying my condo in Oregon. Everything at that range was getting sucked up by PE.
You can get some great deals on multimillion dollar properties where they are not buying but the sweet spot for most buyers they are consuming. That’s my opinion.
Abbot has the ability to call the legislation into session whenever he wants to make them address special needs, he doesn’t need to wait for the next once-every-two-years session. Instead he tweets about it.
Nothing will get done to address this until someone greases his palm about it, and given the signaling here, he’s angling for that grease to come from the corps that own all the houses.
Absolutely, this has to be addressed. Owner-occupied makes the best neighborhoods and cities, in addition to righting the market.
I like how both sides are trying to tackle the issue.
I am not anti-land lord but I am anti-large companies buying up SFH. They just have too much money to screw the market.
SFH are homes for people to live in, raise their families, etc. They are not investments. The large majority of homes should be priced where the average person can buy one.
I guess my question to the OP and any other conservatives here (which I am not, to be up front) is: why is this something you want to solve? I don’t see how regulating this would be in line with conservative principles at all. Wouldn’t the conservative approach to be trusting the free market to eventually right any wrongs brought about?
don’t see how regulating this would be in line with conservative principles at all
Then you don’t understand conservatives well.
Libertarians are all about the free market. Conservatives are about a fair market with light regulations. Also the family is a core concept of conservatism. People owning homes is good for the family. It’s a solid way to build generational wealth.
I would say that it aligns with a broad view of conservatives but not so much the conservative tradition in America, which has historically been fairly libertarian in their approach to the market. Regardless your reply makes sense, so I appreciate it. Sounds like one of those rare items of alignment between our political factions!
Most conservative I know and many are extreme far right don’t support PE buying sfh homes. This seems to be a topic that most people agree on. The American dream is owning a home, among other things but a core concept is home ownership. PE steals that dream from many Americans.
Yep. In the name of profit.
This is why qualitative things (housing, food, education, healthcare, etc.) have no place in a free market. It becomes about the money more than the thing itself which benefits society. Therefore with the expectation of unlimited short term growth the benefit to society is minimized to maximize growth.
This housing situation you’ve caught on to is just one aspect of this out of many.
Now you hold onto your biscuits, mister. Are you suggesting that basic human necessities, things that some might consider human rights, shouldn’t be turned into commodities?
Surely when people are mega rich, they’ll buy stuff and the gains will trickle down! /s
Instead they literally seek rent.
I don’t really wish ill on anyone but I would love for the housing market to just tank.
The problem is someone would want to bail them out.
I am against corporate bailouts excluding true emergencies like COVID.
Otherwise, let them fail. The job of the ELT is run the company and prepare for bad times and good times. If they didn’t prepare, fuck them.
A house is not a standard investment. It is where you live. I don’t mind investment apartments or “condos” or even a few rental homes. My issue is the large amount of money PE can summon to destroy things.
It is why I couldn’t vote for Romney. He made his fortune by destroying things and not creating things. I am not a huge fan of Musk as a person but I respect he has created well paying jobs. For that, I salute him. We need less Romney’s in the world and more people like Musk.
I wouldn’t even bail out for COVID. I’m paying out the ass for insurance and still end up thousands in medical debt.
A gray area exists for small businesses, but fuck corporate welfare.
The government shut them down. The money was to pay salaries to the employees. That is the only reason I support it.
@wintermute_oregon @Mango #COVID19 wasn’t an emergency.
I do declare it was. I was activated back to active duty due to the emergency. We also shut down the United States for several months.
We can debate if it was the right course of action, but it was an emergency even if it was inflicted.
@wintermute_oregon ehhhhhhhh a 1% death rate doesn’t equal an emergency in my book. I get that people were scared, but still, cooler heads should prevail when it comes to government leadership
It’s easy to decide these things from the other side of history. At the time, when very little was known about survivability, transmissivity, etc, it was absolutely an emergency.
This “corporate large-scale buying of residential homes seems to be distorting the market and making it harder for the average Texan to purchase a home,” Republican Gov. Greg Abbott wrote on X last month. “This must be added to the legislative agenda to protect Texas families.”
I think this is a topic we can all agree on. Large corporations should not be buying SFH except in rare situations.
deleted by creator
