• Facebones@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    While I hate the current state of affairs around housing, some people do lose the plot and forget that some people prefer/need to rent and that rent cant just be the mortgage payment because they’re on the hook for repairs, not you.

    Landlords aren’t inherently the problem, they’re a symptom of ALL property owners completely shutting down new development for over 50 years.

    I agree with these ideas but we also need to fund development of new housing, and if anyone wants to complain instead of shutting it down extend an offer to buy their house so they can leave.

    • Zagorath@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      we also need to fund development of new housing

      Hells yeah. That’s why one of the ideas above was that the government should be a significant force in housing. Part of that might be buying up existing homes, but a lot would be funding the construction of new homes.

      I didn’t mention it above because while related, I considered it out of scope for that comment. But I’m also a fierce advocate for abolishing low-density zoning entirely. What my city calls “LMR” (low-medium residential) should be the bare minimum zone for residential areas. That still permits single-family separated homes to be built, but it also automatically permits 2–3 storey townhouses and apartments. Plus zoning areas near (say, within a 400 m walk of) train stations for medium-density residential. (All mixed-use, of course.)

      But this isn’t !fuckcars@lemmy.world or !notjustbikes@feddit.nl, so I’ll leave it at that for now.

    • FitzNuggly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      We also need to look at how mortgage applications are handled. Like if you can pay 3k a month in rent for 2 years (not saying 2 years should be the requirement, just that if you happen to have that history) and can prove it, you should qualify for a mortgage that costs 3k a month.

      • Facebones@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        The idea that affording $3k also means you can afford a $3k mortgage falls under what I’m saying about people swinging too far in the other direction - affording $3k in rent =/= affording a $3k mortgage plus taxes/insurance plus upkeep etc etc.

        That being said our credit system is 100% busted. Engaging in predatory lending to build a credit score should not be the only way to “prove” financial fitness. Just because I pay my credit cards off every month doesn’t mean I don’t still waste like $300/mo on doordash 🤣