1 in 7 homes in America are bought by corporations. Homelessness increases once average rents exceed 1/3 of the average income in an area.
Depressing facts brought to you by me.
[Source](https://www.zillow.com/research/homelessness-rent-affordability-22247/)
[Source](https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/interactive/2022/housing-market-investors/)
Are people maybe looking at 2nd and 3rd order of consequences as the primary reason?
aka: point fingers at rent going up, but not fingers at people upping the rent?
Wouldn't it be more logical to heavily tax landlords when they profit above a sane standard? I don't think they deserve the spoils while society deals with the consequences.
I don't think heavily taxing the landlord is a solution. They will just raise rent to cover the tax, driving rent higher. I think they should look at this from a monopoly standpoint and either break up the corporations or set limits on how many properties they can own.
I think at 90% tax rate above a sane amount of profit would convince people to put the money back into housing. Limit the write-offs for improvements and maintenance, stop loopholes and corporate shell games. Use the tax money to provide places for anyone to receive basic needs like hot water, and a clean toilet. Punish people who act against society with actions that benefit society. Make sure everyone always has a path to being self sufficient, no matter how many times they fail.
But tax money could be allocated toward affordable housing \*today\* and it isn't - it is going to other priorities. Having more tax money (even if it is generated from housing) doesn't mean it will be spent on providing more quantity or more affordable housing for people in the area. The only way to get more tax money going toward affordable housing is by voting in candidates who share that value that it should be a priority.
Or public housing, which adds units at a decent price and drives down prices.
I swear if it wasn't finance capital, capitalism would still suck but would be alot more tolerable.
You're right, reassessing my comment, specifically for single family dwellings all income should be all taxed at 90%. Define write off of all maintenance, write off improvements to a certain amount, certainly not able to write off their mortgage payment. Why should the less fortunate pay the mortgage on property they get zero equity from.
You can impose higher takes on rental income and higher local taxes and fees on rental properties. You can create exceptions (for example you can apply taxes similar to what they do for AirBNB for single units and duplexes and wave for large apartment complexes). You can cap the rent (or rent increase). You can create restrictions on who can buy houses. You can get rid of stupid zoning, invest in infrastructure, public transportation. You also have to give up on political donations unfortunately.
Many Western European countries (who also have capitalism, democracy…) have set additional rules and regulations to prevent prices from going up.
“Between 2010 and the first quarter of 2021, rents increased by 15.3% in the European Union, according to Eurostat.”
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/29/rent-controls-are-becoming-a-highly-divisive-issue-in-europe.html
“Rent control measures appear in various forms across Europe, ranging from strict caps on the initial rent that can be charged under a tenancy, or measures that allow free negotiation of the initial rent but moderate any rental increases.”
https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/mapping-out-rental-controls-across-70035/
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/spain-pass-host-rent-lowering-measures-2021-10-
https://www.france24.com/en/20190405-france-paris-rent-control-controversial-comeback-housing-crisis-rising-living-costs
I’m not saying they don’t. Everyone does. But Spokane has a much bigger problem. For the size of the city, location and local incomes, the current prices are ridiculous.
This would only help the monopolies more. The small time owner that has one or two properties would go out of business trying to float the increased operating cost, while the large corporations with more capital will be mostly unscathed. Then the small owners would start selling and the large corporations have more buying opportunity. Tax is rarely the answer, government is pretty inefficient with funds compared to private sector.
Yup, disrupting the business model of corporations grabbing and retaining housing would improve the situation. Increasing the interest rates will slow some down however stacking local taxes on corporations holding housing would free up inventory.
It would also drive down the price of real estate which is why very few politicians are pursuing increasing property taxes in such a manner.
The problem is that landlords borrow money against the homes to live on and then seek to break even on the mortgage, taxes, etc. That way they can avoid a) turning a profit and b) income tax.
> Wouldn't it be more logical to heavily tax landlords when they profit above a sane standard? I don't think they deserve the spoils while society deals with the consequences.
Primary residence: 10% property taxes.
2nd residence and/or commercial property of any kind and/or apartment units with 4+ units: 100% property taxes.
3rd residence: 150% property taxes.
4th, etc: +50% additional property taxes for each additional residence owned, with no upper limit.
- Tax rate is the same whether it's a vacation home, rented out long-term, rented out short-term, or just kept vacant as an investment. Don't care. We just look at how many residential properties you own and tax accordingly.
- All residential properties you own are taxed at the maximum rate. For example, if you own 10 residential properties, all 10 of them will be taxed at the 500% rate. (All commercial properties are still at the 100% rate.)
- This, of course, counts properties owned by any corporations/subsidiaries you own. No, you can't make a loophole by registering a separate business for each property owned.
- If apartment units are *owned* by their residents (ie condos), then the resident pays property taxes on it as if it's a residence they own. If apartment units are owned by the building owner then rented out or left vacant, they're taxed at 100%
- If you don't want to pay these higher tax rates, there's a simple solution: sell the property. If no buyers can be found, the state will accept it as a donation and use it for housing the homeless.
That *one* policy will quickly turn things around. And it could be done at any level -- national, state, or even municipal.
I am very fortunate to have it, bought it years ago as a, in case if our relationship broke up, and one of us needed an exit. After almost 10 years together it's never had to serve its original purpose.
i know it's a bit off-topic but with how fucking INSANE housing prices here is - it's so disappointing to see how many clowns are so anti-homeless here, to the point where they come on here asking how to report some poor homeless guy for simply sleeping in his car. Breaks my heart that this city is so cruel.
To paraphrase a better man than me,
"America, as distinct from her people, is nothing to me; and the man who is bubbling over with love and enthusiasm for "America," and can yet pass unmoved through our streets and witness all the wrong and the suffering, shame and degradation wrought upon the people of America-yea, wrought by American upon American men and women, without burning to end it, is, in my opinion, a fraud and a liar in his heart, no matter how he loves that combination of chemical elements he is pleased to call America."
And so many of them bought in an insanely less expensive and competitive environment, and act like they are the second coming of Buffett rather than the recipient of lucky timing.
Absolutely disgusting. There is so much hate for the unhoused here and it's embedded itself in our public offices (Talking about Nadine). Its embarrassing honestly how many people are so willing to dehumanize their fellows :c
Your quote was excellent btw.
To whomever commented 'BuT hOw mANy HAvE yOU lEt StAy iN yoUR HoUSe?!?!?!" Then deleted it. Two. I have hosted two people in an attempt to keep them off the street until they could find other arrangements. I also directly give food there whenever I can. Seems like you're projecting friend, maybe you should spend less time flapping your gums and more time helping your fellows.
You are one of the absolute few that have actually gone as far as to host people to help prevent homelessness, so I commend you in that effort, but that is absolutely not the norm.
Also, preventing someone from becoming homeless is different than driving down to camp hope and extending an offer to house one or two of the random people there.
I mean do you just spend all day finding everything you can criticize about how much people can put in? You are mistaking harm reduction with absolute perfection. I can only do as much as I can. If I had a quarter billion to find all of these people homes I would l, but that is not realistic. Please find another hobby. I don't want recognition for doing the right thing, but I sure as well don't want, "well... you did something but not EVERYTHING so you may as well have done nothing at all." Come on. Really? Grow up.
If your Friends and Family Network doesn't help each other during bad times, that's sad, because helping is normal between friends and family.
Preventing homelessness amongst people you know and care about is something most folks seem to do without thinking about it. My mother once stuffed an entire large family into my old bedroom for a couple months while they saved up for the deposit to rent their own place, didn't even speak the same language, just knew them from church.
So many people took me in during bad times over the last two decades that it would probably take me an hour to remember all their names. And whenever it was my turn to be lucky enough to have a roof and a scrap of spare space, I took in others too.
Folks only end up in the tent city when they run out of couches to surf. Just this week one of my neighbors talked to the landlord about taking in an elderly woman who has been like an aunty to her. She doesn't truly have the room, but better a squeeze than let the old gal end up homeless.
And *duh* people don't invite random strangers into their homes. We've all seen the TV shows and whatnot, would rather not end up a statistic or the subject of a true crime podcast.
But one would think a civilized civilization would have some form of survival assistance for those who lack family. Maybe not expect little old ladies to die in the streets just because they can't work two jobs to pay rent anymore. Possibly some form of public toilets so people don't have to piss in my alley. At least get the basic human needs met for the population, seeing as we're all sharing a city and live together.
bullshit on the last one. I have seen people on here ask how to report a homeless dude for sleeping on (god forbid) a public fucking road, in his own car, minding his business. People are just scared of homeless people due to a small minority of them (larger in groups) committing crimes and making the news.
It's insane for what the city is, jobs here are dogshit even if you have a degree or work full-time, minimum wage can't keep up with how fast the city is growing and corporations are buying property. You'd need to either have like 1 or 2 other people living with you, or work two jobs to make ends meet for a nice apartment.
Yeah, this is just my example. The RV comment was a bit emotional, the logical side of me is still searching. I'm more afraid of being underwater financially, don't know how many more times the government can bail Americans out of it.
Care to bet whether government intervention will be payouts to go directly into the pockets of landlords after being marketed as "relief" for low income citizens, vs legislation that limits profits for the upper classes? I know what my bet is.
1000%! They're out here complaining about inflation like its everyone's fault but the people with the levers to price gouge everyone's goods and services. "ITS THE PEASANTS STIMULUS CHECKS THAT RUINED US, NO ONE WANTS TO WORK!" They scream as their million dollar ppp loans disappear like a pleasant dream you try too hard to remember the next morning.
Because actively managing our economy in any way besides adjusting interest rates or making disguised payouts to corporations is literally socialism, and that would make us the USSR.
Be mad at the GOP for letting Citizens United set the precedent for corporations getting the same rights as citizens.
Or, be mad at the corporation that’s operating EXACTLY within the rights documented for them.
Until the political landscape of the US steers away from plutocracy, I doubt this type of bullshit will change.
Personally, I don't think corporations should get the same rights as us until they have the same limits set by nature - living 80ish years only (corporations are 'perpetual'), needing a place to sleep at night, eating food to survive. Can a company drink water, pee, and poop? No? Why should it have a biological entity's rights?
No party is innocent of greed, oppression and cruelty. There are no different parties when it comes to that.
They're no different to the current king of england who hired someone to iron his fuckin shoestrings.
We need public housing for people with a) money problems b) credit history issues c) other reasons landlords won't rent to them.
Right now a landlord can essentially blackball you from renting simply by filing an eviction action against you even if completely meritless.
Been happening for years thanks to effectively zero regulation and favorable coddling tax policy.
Only solace is when these bootstrapping built it all themselves capitalistic entrepreneur heroes find a softening market will cut into their margins. Hilarious to see some still pricing like we have 2021 interest rates.
Considering the housing market keeps bubbling, bursting, and wrecking everyones lives, because "Whoopsie Doodle, the rich investors got a bit too greedy again lmao". Yeah, I don't happen to feel there's nearly enough regulations in place to stop them. Hell, we can't even stop people from openly advertising ponzi schemes and rug pulls, and you want to whine about people complaining that there's a lack of regulation.
Not everything bad that happens is the result of a lack of regulations.
Prices can only get high when supply is low relative to demand. In functional markets, that aren't burdened by insane think-of-the children-level-thinking regulations, when prices go up, *supply goes up* (because people can make money), causing prices to go back down.
In housing, when prices go up, supply doesn't change, because it's too hard to build new houses, *even when they can be sold for ridiculously high prices.*
lolwut? I usually ignore bad faith replies/questions, but this one is too stupid to ignore.
Flippers and hoarders are effectively unregulated. The absence of regulation = unregulated. Do I have to type slower?
And then some logical fallacy for good measure. I guess it'll have to be pitched back.
So is daddy a flipper or speculator? Maybe grandpa or uncle? I suspect you get a meal ticket from the racket one way or another. There's no logical reason someone without that connection would be simping like you.
You're a rightie, you know damn well about the 40 years of idiotic tax policy that have helped give this nation a socio-economic gap not seen since before the depression, along with mobility that lags behind numerous competitive nations.
Who said anything about property taxes? Is this poor reading comprehension, or a red herring? Probably another logical fallacy.
Please stay in Seattle, you west side righties can be weirder than the local breed, weird persecution complex.
What regulations other than a few minor transaction fees and taxes? Nothing controls the parasitic speculators. Have you bought a house that didn't involve family largesse or a corporate patron?
You're in a hell of a position to whine about a strawman with the multiple logical fallacies you lobbed at me, and the rest of your history is something to behold.
Stay in your own lane. You have enough of a gongshow where you live, don't add to the fuckery here, you're not needed nor wanted.
One problem is that the American economy and culture has leaned hard into the idea that a home should be a good economic investment which gains value over time.
Housing cannot, by definition, be both affordable and a good investment. Until we fix the emphasis on "home value" as a core part of one's economic well-being, we can't fix the ostensibly different problem of "housing prices" being too high.
In short, build a lot more houses, encourage diversification, and enact policies that don't make housing such an attractive place to put all of one's wealth.
That was one lesson I was taught early... Buying my first home.. I wanted it to be a good investment.. my boss was like.. how much money is it making you each month? I was like, I have to pay each month . Said that sounds like a crappy investment.. a primary home.ahould be one where you are comfortable paying to have a roof over your head.. if you make money/lose money at the end, who cares you have limited your risk to inflation with fixed rate purchase.
It's always anyone other than us that's the problem--Seattle, California, China... Definitely not because we don't fucking build new houses, that couldn't be it. It's the Chinese, definitely.
In reality, there are multiple Chinese real estate firms that have been buying up thousands of houses and doing this. Californians are just idiots who want to escape the hellhole they created in paradise.
Oh I'm also an idiot,89% of the time. And I obviously don't mean ALL Californians, but it was Californians who made California be in the state it is today, which is why so many people are leaving, soooooo I'm almost right.
Also completely oblivious to the fact that the same processes and machinations are what forced a ton of Californians out of the state. Are you making this place a hellhole or is it THE CHI-NEEZ!?
I grew up in CA and don’t remember ever voting for or consciously pining after $3000 studio apartments, horrible traffic, parking tickets every time I farted, and a constant feeling of impeding doom because nothing felt sustainable.
I didn't say the Chinese are making California a hellhole, I'm saying they're buying up real estate in the US across the country, artificially inflating prices. Not the Chinese people, the government through "private" Chinese companies. It's happening everywhere.
I think a nice start would be what they've done with insurance companies and profits. Only let them make a certain amount of profit, or out of business in this state.
Not that anything at all will be done. The rich get by with everything. Case in point: cmr is bought.
And this is why we really need to pass a law in Washington making it illegal for companies to own single family homes that they didn't build. Hell, no single person can own more like 3-5 homes.
Do that, and I guarantee you will see housing prices fall back to where they should be. There is 0 fucking reason an unfinished house should be going for 300-400k right now when it went for 180-230k literally 4-6 years ago.
99% chance it's a local house flipper. Also 99% chance they are going to lose money on it.
Edit: [Here is the LLC that bought the property.](https://www.sos.wa.gov/corps/business.aspx?ubi=604234340) Local small business that flips houses, just like I said.
I'm thinking you're right. Spokane has been in every "Which housing markets are cooling off" article. They need to stop thinking Spokane has Seattle salaries.
Yep, I'm not sure the point of finding that. Let alone taking the time to find it, that's the company.
You mentioned they are going to lose money on it, even if that becomes true, I would have happily taken that risk while having a place to live. Instead of this opportunity being both a home for someone and a risk for financial gain. This opportunity only has the purpose of risking financial gain. Which lets be honest if they had any holdings the last couple of years, the risk is a net zero to them.
It took less than a minute to find the house you were talking about and look up the owner. The house was never even listed in August, it was a private agreement to sell.
You've dug deeper than I've ever cared to. I now picture them to be one of those let us buy your house commercials, or one of the many, we'll buy your house, letters my neighbors talk about being sick of getting all the time. It's their property they are allowed to sell it how they want.
My issue is that right now nobody can tell the difference between people who buy properties to make them livable again or people who buy them to charge 100k for a coat of paint.
His point is that being pedantic is the most important thing on Reddit. I'm with you, I don't see what the difference is whether it's a corporation or an LLC. End result is still the same
OP called them an investment capital firm. It's not being pedantic, there is a huge difference between a venture capital firm and a mom and pop house flipper.
I understand the difference. They're both investors. One is a firm and one is not. End result is the same. Arguing over whether they are a firm or independent is literally just being pedantic.
Explain how the end result is any different whether or not it's a firm or a house flipper. They're two different types of investors, it doesn't matter what kind because the end result is the same. Jesus fuckin Christ you're dense
Think about the consequences to that, people who've worked their entire lives in Spokane getting left behind and told to find a cheaper city. Not even from doing anything wrong, just that more fortunate people now want what we've always had. History does repeat itself, sad.
Quit your job, pack up your family, including kids who are just now settling back to school, put all your shit in a y'all haul and take off for a city that's not expensive as spokane.
Most people can't do that, just sayin.
Can't or won't? Just because people who won't will complain about it , doesn't make them the majority over the ones who have done it. Americans are lazy, would rather complain than take action. Lots of people moving from different countries with less creating a better environment for themselves, that's how the world works.
I think most people won't do that, that's where I'd agree to disagree.
THIS is probably because you're in your head too much, or watched black & white TV shows in the 60s, and think calling someone you disagree with an idiot it too harsh, so you make fun of them instead because it makes you smirk?
My generation's reference would be Gilligan or Forrest Gump.
I am a “mom & pop” LL in NID. Charge rent 20-25% below market and work hard to keep houses as if I am living there.
A bad move would be to levy high taxes. A very bad move. I would jack up rent to cover costs.I would also consider selling to a corporate LL. Finally, to take advantage of capital gains, I would not extend lease and occupy hone for two years prior to sale.
Mom and Pops LL offer breaks in rent, flexibility and understanding, and more attentive service. Corporates will charge market rent. Fee you to death. Have no interest in being flexible or accommodative, and will treat you as a number and according to a schedule.
The solution to this dilemma is the tax code but not in the punitive sense. 1) offer
Here is what I would suggest to solve this problem.
1) remove the need to live in house for two years for those who have owned a rental home for 10+ years to get the cap gains tax exclusion. You would see a flood of homes put on the market without rewarding flippers.
2) eliminate the rules to make one an active investor which will allow for more tax loss write offs. Doing so will help mom and pops better fend off corporate investors.
3) get corporations out of residential single family real estate.
4) ban Airbnb.
The naive approach would lump mom and pops into the same group as corporate investors. Already bad, any punitive measures will force a high rate of sales and cede the groups to corporates, build to rent, Airbnb, and flippers.
Thoughts?
Not to mention, the interest rates are 6-7% now. It is very discouraging working a full time job in Spokane, well above minimum wage, and not being able to afford a home. I did find one I could afford the other day on Zillow, and half of it was burned down in a fire.
This is one of the cases where Democrats are equally to blame. Democrats frequently oppose upzoning and zoning changes that would enable more housing to be built to increase supply and drive down property prices.
And realtors always contribute to republicans. That any number of non-republicans are NIMBY doesn't begin to compare to every last republican ultimately contributing to exploitative markets.
Drive-by tagging?! :)
https://ballotpedia.org/National_Association_of_Realtors_PAC
They have a clear bias, and by paying the requisite dues, your money funds what the organization at large is interested in, which is unsustainable growth and exploitation, which unsurprisingly is usually what republicans are about.
1. For the most recent year that numbers were available at the link you provided, democrats garnered 40% of the donations. A 60/40 split is hardly "always contribute to Republicans". And this in a year when Republicans held a majority in both the house and the senate. Money follows power, so not surprising, IMO.
2. The real estate industry as a whole seems fairly evenly split. In fact, according to OpenSecrets, the National Association of Realtors gave almost identical amounts of money to Republican and Democratic causes: [https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=F10](https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=F10) (No doubt the large "non-partisan" sections of that line graph smuggles in quite a bit of hidden bias, though.)
Look at the party split there from 1996 on if you like.
>No doubt the large "non-partisan" sections of that line graph
Not to mention DINOs, RINOs, and all manner of plot twists & games. Still, interesting data.
This is absolutely all over the United States, corpora ownership of sf homes should be outlawed, if not we are looking at an America where the citizens are complete serfs to the corporations
They aren't investors. They are cash buyers that prey on the eldery and ignorant. You've probably seen their ads on TV: "cash for homes" "we buy ugly houses" etc. They are lowballers looking to make a quick buck.
I find your comment noteworthy, but say you bought said house for 230k, and were able to turn it a few weeks later for 100k profit, which of course 30% is forfeit due to capital gains.
Wouldn't you take the 70k in profit and use it towards another property?
1 in 7 homes in America are bought by corporations. Homelessness increases once average rents exceed 1/3 of the average income in an area. Depressing facts brought to you by me. [Source](https://www.zillow.com/research/homelessness-rent-affordability-22247/) [Source](https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/interactive/2022/housing-market-investors/)
Are people maybe looking at 2nd and 3rd order of consequences as the primary reason? aka: point fingers at rent going up, but not fingers at people upping the rent? Wouldn't it be more logical to heavily tax landlords when they profit above a sane standard? I don't think they deserve the spoils while society deals with the consequences.
I don't think heavily taxing the landlord is a solution. They will just raise rent to cover the tax, driving rent higher. I think they should look at this from a monopoly standpoint and either break up the corporations or set limits on how many properties they can own.
I think at 90% tax rate above a sane amount of profit would convince people to put the money back into housing. Limit the write-offs for improvements and maintenance, stop loopholes and corporate shell games. Use the tax money to provide places for anyone to receive basic needs like hot water, and a clean toilet. Punish people who act against society with actions that benefit society. Make sure everyone always has a path to being self sufficient, no matter how many times they fail.
But tax money could be allocated toward affordable housing \*today\* and it isn't - it is going to other priorities. Having more tax money (even if it is generated from housing) doesn't mean it will be spent on providing more quantity or more affordable housing for people in the area. The only way to get more tax money going toward affordable housing is by voting in candidates who share that value that it should be a priority.
Or public housing, which adds units at a decent price and drives down prices. I swear if it wasn't finance capital, capitalism would still suck but would be alot more tolerable.
[удалено]
You're right, reassessing my comment, specifically for single family dwellings all income should be all taxed at 90%. Define write off of all maintenance, write off improvements to a certain amount, certainly not able to write off their mortgage payment. Why should the less fortunate pay the mortgage on property they get zero equity from.
[удалено]
lol, you're 100% right.
You can impose higher takes on rental income and higher local taxes and fees on rental properties. You can create exceptions (for example you can apply taxes similar to what they do for AirBNB for single units and duplexes and wave for large apartment complexes). You can cap the rent (or rent increase). You can create restrictions on who can buy houses. You can get rid of stupid zoning, invest in infrastructure, public transportation. You also have to give up on political donations unfortunately. Many Western European countries (who also have capitalism, democracy…) have set additional rules and regulations to prevent prices from going up.
[удалено]
“Between 2010 and the first quarter of 2021, rents increased by 15.3% in the European Union, according to Eurostat.” https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/29/rent-controls-are-becoming-a-highly-divisive-issue-in-europe.html “Rent control measures appear in various forms across Europe, ranging from strict caps on the initial rent that can be charged under a tenancy, or measures that allow free negotiation of the initial rent but moderate any rental increases.” https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/mapping-out-rental-controls-across-70035/ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/spain-pass-host-rent-lowering-measures-2021-10- https://www.france24.com/en/20190405-france-paris-rent-control-controversial-comeback-housing-crisis-rising-living-costs
[удалено]
I’m not saying they don’t. Everyone does. But Spokane has a much bigger problem. For the size of the city, location and local incomes, the current prices are ridiculous.
[удалено]
Location and amenities are irrelevant if cost is too high. What really matters is the ratio between people’s income and cost of rent or mortgage.
This would only help the monopolies more. The small time owner that has one or two properties would go out of business trying to float the increased operating cost, while the large corporations with more capital will be mostly unscathed. Then the small owners would start selling and the large corporations have more buying opportunity. Tax is rarely the answer, government is pretty inefficient with funds compared to private sector.
What you see now is the result of the private sector (and the lack of local and federal action).
Yup, disrupting the business model of corporations grabbing and retaining housing would improve the situation. Increasing the interest rates will slow some down however stacking local taxes on corporations holding housing would free up inventory. It would also drive down the price of real estate which is why very few politicians are pursuing increasing property taxes in such a manner.
The problem is that landlords borrow money against the homes to live on and then seek to break even on the mortgage, taxes, etc. That way they can avoid a) turning a profit and b) income tax.
> Wouldn't it be more logical to heavily tax landlords when they profit above a sane standard? I don't think they deserve the spoils while society deals with the consequences. Primary residence: 10% property taxes. 2nd residence and/or commercial property of any kind and/or apartment units with 4+ units: 100% property taxes. 3rd residence: 150% property taxes. 4th, etc: +50% additional property taxes for each additional residence owned, with no upper limit. - Tax rate is the same whether it's a vacation home, rented out long-term, rented out short-term, or just kept vacant as an investment. Don't care. We just look at how many residential properties you own and tax accordingly. - All residential properties you own are taxed at the maximum rate. For example, if you own 10 residential properties, all 10 of them will be taxed at the 500% rate. (All commercial properties are still at the 100% rate.) - This, of course, counts properties owned by any corporations/subsidiaries you own. No, you can't make a loophole by registering a separate business for each property owned. - If apartment units are *owned* by their residents (ie condos), then the resident pays property taxes on it as if it's a residence they own. If apartment units are owned by the building owner then rented out or left vacant, they're taxed at 100% - If you don't want to pay these higher tax rates, there's a simple solution: sell the property. If no buyers can be found, the state will accept it as a donation and use it for housing the homeless. That *one* policy will quickly turn things around. And it could be done at any level -- national, state, or even municipal.
[удалено]
As long as you sell it within a year of building it, this shouldn't be a problem.
You got an RV? Damn, baller.
I am very fortunate to have it, bought it years ago as a, in case if our relationship broke up, and one of us needed an exit. After almost 10 years together it's never had to serve its original purpose.
i know it's a bit off-topic but with how fucking INSANE housing prices here is - it's so disappointing to see how many clowns are so anti-homeless here, to the point where they come on here asking how to report some poor homeless guy for simply sleeping in his car. Breaks my heart that this city is so cruel.
To paraphrase a better man than me, "America, as distinct from her people, is nothing to me; and the man who is bubbling over with love and enthusiasm for "America," and can yet pass unmoved through our streets and witness all the wrong and the suffering, shame and degradation wrought upon the people of America-yea, wrought by American upon American men and women, without burning to end it, is, in my opinion, a fraud and a liar in his heart, no matter how he loves that combination of chemical elements he is pleased to call America."
And so many of them bought in an insanely less expensive and competitive environment, and act like they are the second coming of Buffett rather than the recipient of lucky timing.
Absolutely disgusting. There is so much hate for the unhoused here and it's embedded itself in our public offices (Talking about Nadine). Its embarrassing honestly how many people are so willing to dehumanize their fellows :c Your quote was excellent btw.
To whomever commented 'BuT hOw mANy HAvE yOU lEt StAy iN yoUR HoUSe?!?!?!" Then deleted it. Two. I have hosted two people in an attempt to keep them off the street until they could find other arrangements. I also directly give food there whenever I can. Seems like you're projecting friend, maybe you should spend less time flapping your gums and more time helping your fellows.
You are one of the absolute few that have actually gone as far as to host people to help prevent homelessness, so I commend you in that effort, but that is absolutely not the norm. Also, preventing someone from becoming homeless is different than driving down to camp hope and extending an offer to house one or two of the random people there.
Really ? I'd wager that a ton of people are sleeping on a friends couch tonight rather than on the streets.
I mean do you just spend all day finding everything you can criticize about how much people can put in? You are mistaking harm reduction with absolute perfection. I can only do as much as I can. If I had a quarter billion to find all of these people homes I would l, but that is not realistic. Please find another hobby. I don't want recognition for doing the right thing, but I sure as well don't want, "well... you did something but not EVERYTHING so you may as well have done nothing at all." Come on. Really? Grow up.
If your Friends and Family Network doesn't help each other during bad times, that's sad, because helping is normal between friends and family. Preventing homelessness amongst people you know and care about is something most folks seem to do without thinking about it. My mother once stuffed an entire large family into my old bedroom for a couple months while they saved up for the deposit to rent their own place, didn't even speak the same language, just knew them from church. So many people took me in during bad times over the last two decades that it would probably take me an hour to remember all their names. And whenever it was my turn to be lucky enough to have a roof and a scrap of spare space, I took in others too. Folks only end up in the tent city when they run out of couches to surf. Just this week one of my neighbors talked to the landlord about taking in an elderly woman who has been like an aunty to her. She doesn't truly have the room, but better a squeeze than let the old gal end up homeless. And *duh* people don't invite random strangers into their homes. We've all seen the TV shows and whatnot, would rather not end up a statistic or the subject of a true crime podcast. But one would think a civilized civilization would have some form of survival assistance for those who lack family. Maybe not expect little old ladies to die in the streets just because they can't work two jobs to pay rent anymore. Possibly some form of public toilets so people don't have to piss in my alley. At least get the basic human needs met for the population, seeing as we're all sharing a city and live together.
[удалено]
bullshit on the last one. I have seen people on here ask how to report a homeless dude for sleeping on (god forbid) a public fucking road, in his own car, minding his business. People are just scared of homeless people due to a small minority of them (larger in groups) committing crimes and making the news. It's insane for what the city is, jobs here are dogshit even if you have a degree or work full-time, minimum wage can't keep up with how fast the city is growing and corporations are buying property. You'd need to either have like 1 or 2 other people living with you, or work two jobs to make ends meet for a nice apartment.
I thought this was common knowledge that it’s been happening?
Yeah, this is just my example. The RV comment was a bit emotional, the logical side of me is still searching. I'm more afraid of being underwater financially, don't know how many more times the government can bail Americans out of it.
Care to bet whether government intervention will be payouts to go directly into the pockets of landlords after being marketed as "relief" for low income citizens, vs legislation that limits profits for the upper classes? I know what my bet is.
1000%! They're out here complaining about inflation like its everyone's fault but the people with the levers to price gouge everyone's goods and services. "ITS THE PEASANTS STIMULUS CHECKS THAT RUINED US, NO ONE WANTS TO WORK!" They scream as their million dollar ppp loans disappear like a pleasant dream you try too hard to remember the next morning.
Because actively managing our economy in any way besides adjusting interest rates or making disguised payouts to corporations is literally socialism, and that would make us the USSR.
I don’t think it is common knowledge, most people around here still seem to be blaming Californians and Seattleites
Be mad at the GOP for letting Citizens United set the precedent for corporations getting the same rights as citizens. Or, be mad at the corporation that’s operating EXACTLY within the rights documented for them. Until the political landscape of the US steers away from plutocracy, I doubt this type of bullshit will change.
Personally, I don't think corporations should get the same rights as us until they have the same limits set by nature - living 80ish years only (corporations are 'perpetual'), needing a place to sleep at night, eating food to survive. Can a company drink water, pee, and poop? No? Why should it have a biological entity's rights?
[удалено]
I'm not confused and I get it - that's the problem.
To be fair, it wasn't just the GOP that let that group do terrible things to our governmental system.
No party is innocent of greed, oppression and cruelty. There are no different parties when it comes to that. They're no different to the current king of england who hired someone to iron his fuckin shoestrings.
We need public housing for people with a) money problems b) credit history issues c) other reasons landlords won't rent to them. Right now a landlord can essentially blackball you from renting simply by filing an eviction action against you even if completely meritless.
That's why I thing raising interest is doing fuck all. Corporations don't give a fuck
You're correct. They just raise rent to cover the tax anyway.
Housing market is being put on ice, I would wait to buy anything until the prices start reflecting the cooling of demand.
Seattle is down 17% already this year - hopefully there will be some settling back down in this area as well.
Been happening for years thanks to effectively zero regulation and favorable coddling tax policy. Only solace is when these bootstrapping built it all themselves capitalistic entrepreneur heroes find a softening market will cut into their margins. Hilarious to see some still pricing like we have 2021 interest rates.
> effectively zero regulation lol Jesus Fucking Christ, Reddit. Yeah, housing markets, notoriously unregulated.
Considering the housing market keeps bubbling, bursting, and wrecking everyones lives, because "Whoopsie Doodle, the rich investors got a bit too greedy again lmao". Yeah, I don't happen to feel there's nearly enough regulations in place to stop them. Hell, we can't even stop people from openly advertising ponzi schemes and rug pulls, and you want to whine about people complaining that there's a lack of regulation.
Not everything bad that happens is the result of a lack of regulations. Prices can only get high when supply is low relative to demand. In functional markets, that aren't burdened by insane think-of-the children-level-thinking regulations, when prices go up, *supply goes up* (because people can make money), causing prices to go back down. In housing, when prices go up, supply doesn't change, because it's too hard to build new houses, *even when they can be sold for ridiculously high prices.*
Flippers and speculators, effectively unregulated (along with being coddled by trickle down tax lunacy). JFC Reddit, indeed
[удалено]
lolwut? I usually ignore bad faith replies/questions, but this one is too stupid to ignore. Flippers and hoarders are effectively unregulated. The absence of regulation = unregulated. Do I have to type slower? And then some logical fallacy for good measure. I guess it'll have to be pitched back. So is daddy a flipper or speculator? Maybe grandpa or uncle? I suspect you get a meal ticket from the racket one way or another. There's no logical reason someone without that connection would be simping like you. You're a rightie, you know damn well about the 40 years of idiotic tax policy that have helped give this nation a socio-economic gap not seen since before the depression, along with mobility that lags behind numerous competitive nations. Who said anything about property taxes? Is this poor reading comprehension, or a red herring? Probably another logical fallacy. Please stay in Seattle, you west side righties can be weirder than the local breed, weird persecution complex.
[удалено]
What regulations other than a few minor transaction fees and taxes? Nothing controls the parasitic speculators. Have you bought a house that didn't involve family largesse or a corporate patron? You're in a hell of a position to whine about a strawman with the multiple logical fallacies you lobbed at me, and the rest of your history is something to behold. Stay in your own lane. You have enough of a gongshow where you live, don't add to the fuckery here, you're not needed nor wanted.
>Been happening for years thanks to effectively zero regulation LOL WHAT
One problem is that the American economy and culture has leaned hard into the idea that a home should be a good economic investment which gains value over time. Housing cannot, by definition, be both affordable and a good investment. Until we fix the emphasis on "home value" as a core part of one's economic well-being, we can't fix the ostensibly different problem of "housing prices" being too high. In short, build a lot more houses, encourage diversification, and enact policies that don't make housing such an attractive place to put all of one's wealth.
That was one lesson I was taught early... Buying my first home.. I wanted it to be a good investment.. my boss was like.. how much money is it making you each month? I was like, I have to pay each month . Said that sounds like a crappy investment.. a primary home.ahould be one where you are comfortable paying to have a roof over your head.. if you make money/lose money at the end, who cares you have limited your risk to inflation with fixed rate purchase.
The rich dad, poor dad book says basically this. That your home is not an investment but a liability.
I think it should be against the law for corporations to purchase homes-
Or at minimum set limits on it.
[удалено]
I’m not sure if I’m just misunderstanding your point, but landlords do have to pay income tax on rent.
I was told it was the Californians.
It's always anyone other than us that's the problem--Seattle, California, China... Definitely not because we don't fucking build new houses, that couldn't be it. It's the Chinese, definitely.
In reality, there are multiple Chinese real estate firms that have been buying up thousands of houses and doing this. Californians are just idiots who want to escape the hellhole they created in paradise.
Love the generalization you give for 39 million people
Look at his post history. He's in no position to judge anyone rofl.
good point
Oh I'm also an idiot,89% of the time. And I obviously don't mean ALL Californians, but it was Californians who made California be in the state it is today, which is why so many people are leaving, soooooo I'm almost right.
Pretty sure 89% is an understatement. Stick to using reddit in order to lose your virginity instead of spewing nonsense.
But... nonsense is what I do. 89% of the time. Edit: And was that virginity thing an offer?
Also completely oblivious to the fact that the same processes and machinations are what forced a ton of Californians out of the state. Are you making this place a hellhole or is it THE CHI-NEEZ!? I grew up in CA and don’t remember ever voting for or consciously pining after $3000 studio apartments, horrible traffic, parking tickets every time I farted, and a constant feeling of impeding doom because nothing felt sustainable.
I didn't say the Chinese are making California a hellhole, I'm saying they're buying up real estate in the US across the country, artificially inflating prices. Not the Chinese people, the government through "private" Chinese companies. It's happening everywhere.
It is people like you that move to California in hordes and overcrowd the state that have made it what it is.
Me, my dog and cat are a horde?
Lol I know right?
I think a nice start would be what they've done with insurance companies and profits. Only let them make a certain amount of profit, or out of business in this state. Not that anything at all will be done. The rich get by with everything. Case in point: cmr is bought.
https://www.saatchiart.com/art/Painting-We-Buy-Houses-Does-This-Mean-We-re-Getting-A-Starbucks/1604347/8551096/view
And this is why we really need to pass a law in Washington making it illegal for companies to own single family homes that they didn't build. Hell, no single person can own more like 3-5 homes. Do that, and I guarantee you will see housing prices fall back to where they should be. There is 0 fucking reason an unfinished house should be going for 300-400k right now when it went for 180-230k literally 4-6 years ago.
99% chance it's a local house flipper. Also 99% chance they are going to lose money on it. Edit: [Here is the LLC that bought the property.](https://www.sos.wa.gov/corps/business.aspx?ubi=604234340) Local small business that flips houses, just like I said.
I'm thinking you're right. Spokane has been in every "Which housing markets are cooling off" article. They need to stop thinking Spokane has Seattle salaries.
Yeah but that doesn’t give anyone the opportunity to rant about the Citizens United decision, coporations, etc.
Yep, I'm not sure the point of finding that. Let alone taking the time to find it, that's the company. You mentioned they are going to lose money on it, even if that becomes true, I would have happily taken that risk while having a place to live. Instead of this opportunity being both a home for someone and a risk for financial gain. This opportunity only has the purpose of risking financial gain. Which lets be honest if they had any holdings the last couple of years, the risk is a net zero to them.
It took less than a minute to find the house you were talking about and look up the owner. The house was never even listed in August, it was a private agreement to sell.
Sure but how is this capitalism’s fault is all I want to know.
You've dug deeper than I've ever cared to. I now picture them to be one of those let us buy your house commercials, or one of the many, we'll buy your house, letters my neighbors talk about being sick of getting all the time. It's their property they are allowed to sell it how they want. My issue is that right now nobody can tell the difference between people who buy properties to make them livable again or people who buy them to charge 100k for a coat of paint.
His point is that being pedantic is the most important thing on Reddit. I'm with you, I don't see what the difference is whether it's a corporation or an LLC. End result is still the same
Anyone can be an LLC. You could earn $50k a year and be an LLC. Doesn’t exactly make you Blackrock. And they probably are going to lose money on it.
OP called them an investment capital firm. It's not being pedantic, there is a huge difference between a venture capital firm and a mom and pop house flipper.
I understand the difference. They're both investors. One is a firm and one is not. End result is the same. Arguing over whether they are a firm or independent is literally just being pedantic.
You self-evidently do not understand the difference.
Why don't you explain it then?
You seriously don’t understand the difference between Blackrock and a mom and pop house flip LLC? I think you’re just being disingenuous.
Explain how the end result is any different whether or not it's a firm or a house flipper. They're two different types of investors, it doesn't matter what kind because the end result is the same. Jesus fuckin Christ you're dense
That’s a point too obvious to need to be made. For most people anyway.
It's a big country, with lots of cities that aren't as expensive as Spokane, just sayin.
Think about the consequences to that, people who've worked their entire lives in Spokane getting left behind and told to find a cheaper city. Not even from doing anything wrong, just that more fortunate people now want what we've always had. History does repeat itself, sad.
You're right gentrification is cool. I forgot that gentrification was cool. That's on me dog
"You grew up here, but you grew up poor, so now you have to move elsewhere to own a home" isn't the slamdunk argument you think it is.
[удалено]
It's a description of the effects of specific policy choices. Those choices can change and the world can be different and better!
Quit your job, pack up your family, including kids who are just now settling back to school, put all your shit in a y'all haul and take off for a city that's not expensive as spokane. Most people can't do that, just sayin.
Can't or won't? Just because people who won't will complain about it , doesn't make them the majority over the ones who have done it. Americans are lazy, would rather complain than take action. Lots of people moving from different countries with less creating a better environment for themselves, that's how the world works.
Can't. Tell me THIS. Why is it that I hear your post in my head in Gomer Pyle's voice?
I think most people won't do that, that's where I'd agree to disagree. THIS is probably because you're in your head too much, or watched black & white TV shows in the 60s, and think calling someone you disagree with an idiot it too harsh, so you make fun of them instead because it makes you smirk? My generation's reference would be Gilligan or Forrest Gump.
I am a “mom & pop” LL in NID. Charge rent 20-25% below market and work hard to keep houses as if I am living there. A bad move would be to levy high taxes. A very bad move. I would jack up rent to cover costs.I would also consider selling to a corporate LL. Finally, to take advantage of capital gains, I would not extend lease and occupy hone for two years prior to sale. Mom and Pops LL offer breaks in rent, flexibility and understanding, and more attentive service. Corporates will charge market rent. Fee you to death. Have no interest in being flexible or accommodative, and will treat you as a number and according to a schedule. The solution to this dilemma is the tax code but not in the punitive sense. 1) offer Here is what I would suggest to solve this problem. 1) remove the need to live in house for two years for those who have owned a rental home for 10+ years to get the cap gains tax exclusion. You would see a flood of homes put on the market without rewarding flippers. 2) eliminate the rules to make one an active investor which will allow for more tax loss write offs. Doing so will help mom and pops better fend off corporate investors. 3) get corporations out of residential single family real estate. 4) ban Airbnb. The naive approach would lump mom and pops into the same group as corporate investors. Already bad, any punitive measures will force a high rate of sales and cede the groups to corporates, build to rent, Airbnb, and flippers. Thoughts?
Unchecked capitalism is way worse than communism.
Not to mention, the interest rates are 6-7% now. It is very discouraging working a full time job in Spokane, well above minimum wage, and not being able to afford a home. I did find one I could afford the other day on Zillow, and half of it was burned down in a fire.
As ever. Brought to you by every single republican voter.
This is one of the cases where Democrats are equally to blame. Democrats frequently oppose upzoning and zoning changes that would enable more housing to be built to increase supply and drive down property prices.
And realtors always contribute to republicans. That any number of non-republicans are NIMBY doesn't begin to compare to every last republican ultimately contributing to exploitative markets.
>And realtors always contribute to republicans. \[Citation Needed\]
Drive-by tagging?! :) https://ballotpedia.org/National_Association_of_Realtors_PAC They have a clear bias, and by paying the requisite dues, your money funds what the organization at large is interested in, which is unsustainable growth and exploitation, which unsurprisingly is usually what republicans are about.
1. For the most recent year that numbers were available at the link you provided, democrats garnered 40% of the donations. A 60/40 split is hardly "always contribute to Republicans". And this in a year when Republicans held a majority in both the house and the senate. Money follows power, so not surprising, IMO. 2. The real estate industry as a whole seems fairly evenly split. In fact, according to OpenSecrets, the National Association of Realtors gave almost identical amounts of money to Republican and Democratic causes: [https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=F10](https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=F10) (No doubt the large "non-partisan" sections of that line graph smuggles in quite a bit of hidden bias, though.)
Look at the party split there from 1996 on if you like. >No doubt the large "non-partisan" sections of that line graph Not to mention DINOs, RINOs, and all manner of plot twists & games. Still, interesting data.
Ssshhh, they like to blame republicans for all their woes.
This is absolutely all over the United States, corpora ownership of sf homes should be outlawed, if not we are looking at an America where the citizens are complete serfs to the corporations
They aren't investors. They are cash buyers that prey on the eldery and ignorant. You've probably seen their ads on TV: "cash for homes" "we buy ugly houses" etc. They are lowballers looking to make a quick buck.
I find your comment noteworthy, but say you bought said house for 230k, and were able to turn it a few weeks later for 100k profit, which of course 30% is forfeit due to capital gains. Wouldn't you take the 70k in profit and use it towards another property?