• slaacaa@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    149
    ·
    1 month ago

    Housing is a basic human need, it shouldn’t be allowed to be only an investment. With the other items, you can just say “so don’t buy it”, which is not possible with housing, you have to pay for it, even of you wouldn’t like to.

      • calcopiritus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        56
        ·
        1 month ago

        I’d bet if you were a lego fan you’d say the same about legos.

        Housing and concerts are orders of magnitude apart in “importantness”. All of the items above are not needed to live. A home is needed.

            • Resonosity@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              1 month ago

              I’d add a place where you won’t get attacked or threatened while sleeping, and maybe where you can store your stuff that also won’t get stolen easily

            • Dupree878@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 month ago

              That’s a good classification to have.

              The apartment I lived in until June this year was my or my friends home for 20 years, but I stayed sick after the new neighbors moved in and started destroying the place. I couldn’t have food anymore because of the rodents, roaches, bedbugs and diseased water that started running down the walls and leaking through the ceiling.

          • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 month ago

            You haven’t paid enough attention to notice that the tropic of conversation is that scalping is bad and property scalping is worse, which you seem to agree with, so I don’t know why you’re arguing with people.

      • killingspark@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 month ago

        I agree that “just don’t buy it” is not that easy for culture in general, it could be applied to hypermonetized events.

        I’m not sure I get your second point. How is Ticketmaster enabled by people boycotting events that get scalped?

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          How is Ticketmaster enabled by people boycotting events that get scalped?

          They aren’t by that specifically, but they are by transferring the blame to scalpers and the victims of both scalpers and Ticketmaster…

      • Hyperlon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        An Important want for sure, but not a necessity in any way shape or form. You won’t die or get sick by not attending a concert or a guitar would be listed in survival guildes

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Yeah. Not to mention that a lot of people’s social identity, social activities and sense of community are all tied up in going to concerts together…

    • timestatic@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      Honestly, I get what you mean, but it also provides funding for new housing projects to be built first, and if you weren’t allowed to invent in it it would also not really be possible to rent a house, since that relies on someone paying for the house first.

      • lightrush@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Housing construction isn’t funded by existing housing investment. It’s generally funded by debt. Private or public, just like any other capital intensive endeavor. And debt isn’t created by lending people’s savings but by creating new money. By public or private lenders. (Private lenders create money too.) The only thing that is really needed ahead of time is labor, equipment and materials available. Financial capital is created on demand to mobilize those real resources.

  • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    132
    ·
    1 month ago

    The worst thing about this is that housing is essential, while all the other things aren’t. Scalpers only take advantage of other people’s shopping addiction, while these so-called “investors” take advantage of other people’s basic needs.

    • phx@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’ll add to that: The PlayStation etc scalpers at least give you a still-new product at the inflated price. The landlords rent it out for additional income and THEN sell it at a profit.

      So it’s more like buying a PS5 for $500, having somebody rent to play it for $100/mo, then selling it for $800 after a year

      • lugal@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        This isn’t even true were I live. Investors will buy new appartments and leave them empty and sell them a few years later. Renting them would decrease the value more than the income is. It’s worse than you thought.

    • desktop_user
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      basic needs make good investments unless the government supplies a viable alternative.

        • GiveMemes@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Unable to see the argument behavior. The government, the other commenter is saying, must provide a viable alternative in order to prevent this behavior.

    • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      The commonality here is how expensive the things are. Scalping is another one of those things that’s trashy if you’re poor and classy if you’re rich.

  • bunchberry@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    It always impresses me how much people worship landlords, even Canada up there is having a housing crisis but nobody dares question the sanctity of landlords. You can watch both the major parties arguing for hours and nobody ever brings up landlordism once. A lot of them choose to instead become hostile to immigrants, both parties moving further right on immigration because stopping immigration or potentially even kicking out immigrants to them is more acceptable than questioning the sanctity of landlords. You also saw a similar thing here in the USA, I remember after the Trump/Kamala debate when they revealed the plans for bringing housing prices down and Trump was “mass deportation” and Kamala was “a tax credit.” Not sure about every country definitely here in US and Canada, people here treat landlords like unquestionable deities, the idea that their right to rule should even be called into question is not even something that passes through most people’s heads.

    • flambonkscious@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      One thing that started here in New Zealand was reporting on and ranking their portfolio sizes (lots had it tied up in an estate or trust, but that connection was able to be reported on - even if it might be ‘co-owned by the family’).

      We still have huge problems in this area but the noble few that don’t ‘stand out like a dogs bollocks’ and all the others just looked like the same bunch of psycho/sellouts

  • pixelscript@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    At least in the case of fumos these days they’re made-to-order. Buying 10 of them isn’t snatching 10 of them from the carts of other potential buyers, it just means 10 more fumos will be made. If anything it’s strictly increasing the supply and making them more accessible to people who couldn’t make the preorder window.

    This was absolutely not the case a few years ago, though. And just because you’re technically not scalping doesn’t mean you can’t still wildly overcharge.

  • 211@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I think most of you are underestimating the cost of housing maintenance. We had some bad luck and a couple of structurally necessary renos were bigger than initially thought, or didn’t address the issue as well as we hoped, requiring new renos. In the last 20 years we’ve paid the cost of our townhouse apartment once over, easy. And now the bathroom, kitchen, and flooring could use an upgrade (25-50 years old), which is again expensive. In that time its value has risen maybe 50%, not quite keeping pace with local inflation.

    Not complaining, we bought it for living in and it’s been great for that, and now that everything is at the end of its lifespan is a good time to really make it ours. But house prices aren’t rising insanely everywhere, house upkeep isn’t free (there are always “modifications”), and at least here the average ROI for being a landlord is abt 4-6%, same as stocks lately, and that’s assuming no major surprises.

    • Katana314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      If you only own one house, it sucks to have luck like that. But, it’s like the dips in stock prices - overall, the value of the whole market goes up over time. Those treating homes as investments tend to buy in the demand areas, where a few lofty renovations don’t dent their bottom line.

      • 211@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        If you get an investment house you plan to keep for 20+ years, those in-demand areas change (here’s hoping the next areas to lose their lustre will be the car-dependent suburbia).

    • bunchberry@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      Not sure I see the relevance. Yes, housing maintenance costs money, what’s the relevance? Who says housing upkeep is free? What’s the relevance to anything at all?

      • 211@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        “Sold it for a much higher price without ever using or modifying it.” Proper upkeep over several years counts as “modifying it” in this context IMHO.

        • bunchberry@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          You can indeed make money by selling it at a higher price without ever using or modifying it, and even if you do use or modify it, profits from the sale still come directly from not using or modifying it.

        • Nat (she/they)
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Don’t buy something meant to be used and insist you must make a profit for not using it. Rent it out at least.

          • 211@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Yea, absolutely, hence the approximated 4-6% return on investment - some years more, some years negative.

            There is this apartment that I’ve been eyeing for a while, and I’ve seriously considered becoming one of those loathed landlords myself. Feels like trying to do right by the apartment and by a tenant would be putting out more good to the world than a passive stock fund, you know? So been reading up on it quite a bit lately.

  • coolguy@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 month ago

    Just as with all of those items, the “solution” is to decrease regulation and increase supply in the market.

    • stevedice@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 month ago

      This is literally what caused the UK to fall back into a housing crisis that they had mostly solved with heavy regulation.

  • icdmize@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    All that shit’s gone to garbage except for houses, don’t ask me how I know. <_<

    • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 month ago

      People with lots of money shouldn’t be allowed to make other people suffer.

      If I punched you in the face, I’d be in trouble. But if I drive up housing process so you become homeless, well that’s your fault.

      • Sarmyth@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        What the hell does that have to do with luxury goods? The house is the only thing you Might not consider a luxury good because you need housing but, owning your own property and not sharing walls with a neighbor is in fact, a luxury.

        • aim_at_me@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 month ago

          Shelter is a basic right. And private landlords have been disastrous for the price of housing.

          • Sarmyth@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            A home is 1 form of shelter. The luxury form. Much in the way a Ferrari is a form of transport vs a bike. The meme doesn’t show shelter in the context of a basic right. It’s showing a luxury good among other luxury goods.

            • Nat (she/they)
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              Rent goes up too as property prices go up, because they know they can get away with it. And those are basically your 2 options unless you’re lucky enough to know people willing to house you for free (buy then they’re still struggling with prices).

              I’m lucky enough that I have the option to fall back on my parents right now, but I need to leave Florida for safety reasons and wherever I go I will not know anybody and hence not get that 3rd option.

        • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          Maybe I missed it, but I think the OP is about how home “investors” are also scalpers. So the topic is home investors.

          • Sarmyth@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            If them buying it denied other legitimate buyers with the same purchasing power from doing so, then yes. A home is too unique a purchase to be scalped though. It’s like art in that the house is the only 1 one available exactly like it. The same exact house built on a corner or further in on the block have different values.

            2 pairs of the exact same sneaker treated the same from the same production run are practically identical. Market manipulation through scalping is the only method to raise it’s price at the time of market sale.

            Tickets have a limited duration they hold ANY value so their prices can be manipulated through scalping too.

            Houses just shouldn’t be in the same conversation.

            • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 month ago

              This take only makes sense when there’s more houses than needed she people can be picky. That’s not this world.

              • Sarmyth@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 month ago

                There are as many houses as people want but not all the the quality or location they want. Manufactured homes can be dropped on lots for a fraction of the price. People live in the central valley and commute so they can have a home for much less. The world will never have everything everyone wants the way they want it. Thats not this world.

                • Nat (she/they)
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  This world also usually requires you physically reach your place of work, which is typically inside cities. Long commutes cost lots of money and waste a large chunk of your life. And hey, if those cheap houses were available in cities, people would buy them, but they’re not. You can’t blame buyers for a supply shortage.

                  I think you fundamentally don’t understand the issue. The issue is land, not the houses built on top of them. Land is limited, and the investors scalp the land first and foremost. There’s usually enough land to house people well, but scalpers prefer scarcity so they can profit. Also, a lot of land is used very stupidly, just look at American-style suburbs.