• SleezyDizasta@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    5 months ago

    I mean I agree with the notion that corporations shouldn’t be buying up entire neighborhoods, but at the same time if a corporation is building neighborhoods then I think it’s fine if they own them. We need more units ultimately

    • Clent@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      And that kids is how I ended up I owing my soul to the company store.

      • SleezyDizasta@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        That’s stupid. If a company is buying up already existing units to manipulate prices then there’s clearly an issue with that, but if a company is buildings new units to sell or rent, then where’s the problem? They’re literally introducing new units to the market. God, people on Lemmy are so brain dead.

        • Clent@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          It’s one thing to build a house and sell it, it’s another to build it for the sole purpose of renting it at peak market rate.

          Corporations use to build company towns and rented them at higher rates than they paid the workers.

          People fought to stop this but there are always people who insist on relearning these lessons the hard way.

          • SleezyDizasta@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            There’s nothing wrong with the concept of renting. It only becomes a problem when companies are manipulating the market or price gouging. If companies are renting out units are peak market rate, then the issue there’s way more demand than supply. The solution is fairly easy, build more units to flood the market and bring down the prices. It’s a tried and true method. Want to see in action? Look at how Texas managed to get all of its major cities to have a big decrease in their average rents compared to last year:

            https://www.kvue.com/article/money/economy/boomtown-2040/austins-rent-prices-decrease-may-2023-2024-spring-texas-us-metros-cities/269-95b267ee-6a4f-4623-af6c-7015ce3cb086#:~:text=The report states that from,but throughout the entire country.

            Austin managed to slash rent prices by 9.3%, San Antonio by 8.2%, Dallas by 3.7%, Houston by 3.2%. It’s not just Texas, Nashville managed to slash prices by 8.3%, Atlanta by 5.2%, Baltimore by 5.5%, and the list goes on and on. What’s the thing common with all these cities? They build more units. They flood the market with so many units that landlords have no choice but to bring rent prices down.

            It’s not just rents, housing prices are also down in places that build more:

            https://www.realtor.com/news/trends/home-prices-falling-cities-where-prices-dropped-most-past-year/

            Home prices went down by 11.2% in Miami, Denver by 6.3%, Seattle by 5.5%, Kansas city by 4.9%, and the list goes on and on.

            Want cheaper rents and houses? BUILD MORE HOUSES. Can’t do that? Update the outdated zoning laws to allow for multifamily buildings, mixed zoning properties, and higher density. This is the path forward.

            • Clent@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              These articles are speculative on the cause. I don’t see any data on the supply increases.

              Some of these cities, didn’t increase supply. For example San Francisco saw similar decreases it they offer to exploration there.

              The rents decreases are year over year but are flat over a two or three period of time, it’s just as likely the rent increases were a bubble that popped and not because of some unspecified change in supply.