I live out in the boonies. It’s cheaper here, but not really when you factor in the costs of travel to get literally anything. Your money is just going into different pockets.
Sparse areas have other costs. Like, you can’t get anywhere without a car, there’s fewer jobs, less social stuff. Cities have much higher potential on most metrics that matter.
Why grace to send homeowners? Tax those people, nobody needs to own a second house and pay some form of reduced taxes.
Tax it at the same rate money on the bank is taxed (if not already) and if it is rented out, tax that rent income as well.
You’re right. It should be all 2+ homeowners. I gave the concession because my target is the ultra rich and the rich, not just the boomers that bought at the right time and have holiday homes.
In my head I could see if we all pushed for 2+ homes instead of 3+ homes then the result would be only to tax the second home and not the 3rd, 4th, etc.
Although the best result would be to tax the 2+, i need to attack the rich and ultra rich right now. Those fuckers are really ruining it for the rest of us
If you really want to tax the rich you need to fix the loaning system in the US and stop the normalisation of taking loans for everything is part of that.
You don’t need a 30.000$ car if you can only afford it with a lone a 5000$ car will be fine etc
That’s not enough, well it might be enough in the US, but here in NL people who are officially Dutch or have been through the process as a refuge to get housing and food etc. Should have at least some kind of shelter.
Then there are still the like 2 (estimation) people in this country who choose to be homeless for whatever reason. I don’t try to judge, but there might be some mental issues involved.
And then there are the people who came here from other countries, but haven’t gone through the official channels. Some of which came to work, lost their job and cannot find somewhere else to work. Generally this group has housing paid for by their employer, but if you don’t have one you don’t have a house, at least not here in NL.
There are probably other examples in other countries where basically everybody can have some place to live, but there are still homeless people. I don’t believe you just need free housing, you probably need some extra social security and the social opinion on homeless people or people who are at the bottom of society needs to change.
The real anti homeless infrastructure is cheap or free housing
You forgot to add “in city centers”. Nobody wants free housing where it’s already cheap.
I live out in the boonies. It’s cheaper here, but not really when you factor in the costs of travel to get literally anything. Your money is just going into different pockets.
Sparse areas have other costs. Like, you can’t get anywhere without a car, there’s fewer jobs, less social stuff. Cities have much higher potential on most metrics that matter.
There are plenty of cheap cities, but it’s the high cost coastal cities being asked to provide free housing.
City centers might be a bit much but suburbs are a lot more reasonable. And I don’t mean the single detached house style suburbs.
Depends on the country, “cheap” in NL is still like 150k for a one bedroom appartment in de “middle of knowwhere”
Let’s consider a tax on vacant homes. If landlords got charged market rent for vacancies the house prices would plummet.
Grace to second homeowners or set-length renovations.
How is taxing 3% of inventory going to make prices “plummet”?
Sorry, I never mentioned USA. https://usafacts.org/articles/how-many-vacant-homes-are-there-in-the-us/ Its about 10%.
Why grace to send homeowners? Tax those people, nobody needs to own a second house and pay some form of reduced taxes. Tax it at the same rate money on the bank is taxed (if not already) and if it is rented out, tax that rent income as well.
You’re right. It should be all 2+ homeowners. I gave the concession because my target is the ultra rich and the rich, not just the boomers that bought at the right time and have holiday homes.
In my head I could see if we all pushed for 2+ homes instead of 3+ homes then the result would be only to tax the second home and not the 3rd, 4th, etc.
Although the best result would be to tax the 2+, i need to attack the rich and ultra rich right now. Those fuckers are really ruining it for the rest of us
If you really want to tax the rich you need to fix the loaning system in the US and stop the normalisation of taking loans for everything is part of that. You don’t need a 30.000$ car if you can only afford it with a lone a 5000$ car will be fine etc
Why not both
It’s actually social services. You gotta treat the reason they’re homeless in the first place.
To my knowledge, “housing first” programs work pretty good
No but see they need to be punished so they still exist as an example to motivate workers and create an internal other to justify police.
Not to help them. Why would we help them? Stop trolling.
I was always scared of becoming homeless when I was a kid. It motivates people to work hard: the beatings will continue until morale improves.
And that fear would be worth every street in the city smelling like piss at all times even if it didn’t enable rampant exploitation and rent seeking!
nimbyism prevents that,
That’s not enough, well it might be enough in the US, but here in NL people who are officially Dutch or have been through the process as a refuge to get housing and food etc. Should have at least some kind of shelter.
Then there are still the like 2 (estimation) people in this country who choose to be homeless for whatever reason. I don’t try to judge, but there might be some mental issues involved.
And then there are the people who came here from other countries, but haven’t gone through the official channels. Some of which came to work, lost their job and cannot find somewhere else to work. Generally this group has housing paid for by their employer, but if you don’t have one you don’t have a house, at least not here in NL.
There are probably other examples in other countries where basically everybody can have some place to live, but there are still homeless people. I don’t believe you just need free housing, you probably need some extra social security and the social opinion on homeless people or people who are at the bottom of society needs to change.