Harris puts housing at center of economic pitch to US voters
Harris puts housing at center of economic pitch to US voters
U.S. home prices have risen 50% in the last five years and rents have risen 35%, according to real estate firm Zillow.
"I keep hearing about the suburban woman doesn't like Trump," he said at a campaign event in Howell, Michigan last week. "I keep the suburbs safe. I stopped low-income towers from rising right alongside of their house, and I'm keeping the illegal aliens away from the suburbs."
At an Aug. 16 campaign stop in North Carolina, Harris called for building 3 million more housing units in four years, on top of the 1 million or so built annually by the private sector, through a new tax credit for developers who build homes aimed at first-time homebuyers and a $25,000 tax credit for those buyers.
- Trump's remarks are reminiscent of how red lining was pushed. Same language. John Oliver did a great piece on it.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_-0J49_9lwc
- Harris's plan is estimated to cost tax payers a lot long term. However, that is what investments in our future will look like.
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a nonpartisan watchdog group, estimates those policies would cost at least $200 billion over 10 years.
I feel the problem will only get solved if we eliminate housing as an investment. The housing market has obviously been gamed and is a false indicator of wealth. There is no way a 1200 sf POS house is worth $300,000.
Agree. We have politicians ballooning the market and most are share holders, landlords, or developers. We also need to reevaluate school funding using property taxes. Different beast but still attached at the hip.
1200sq ft only worth $300,000? 🤣 My 820 SQ ft home on 1600 SQ ft of land cost nearly $880,000 a few years ago, and is currently valued at 1.2 million on redfin, though that's ridiculous. And it's pretty average quality, just in a relatively nice neighborhood in a major city on the US West Coast. It's insane.
Yea but it has no septic and isn’t actually livable.
You're entirely right but the reality of it is that people's houses are effectively one of their biggest investments. That's a tough hill to climb back down from.
Not terribly difficult at all actually. You don't get to own more than one residence. Legally. Anyone who does has two years to sell it. Anyone whose company exists to profit off of renting out residential housing has to liquidate all assets and use the funds to reimburse those they stole from.
Oh, you meant a difficult idea to sell to the owner class. Well yeah anything mildly progressive will be fiercely opposed by those who stand to be slightly less rich because of it.
These tax credits need to be conditional on zoning reform in the neighborhood or we're not going to fix anything.
Agreed. We allow industrial building to infest residential areas ( usually minority areas ), we need to fix the laws. That includes local because they hold a lot of power. Incentives local governments to stop redlining and remove old racist laws on the books.
I wish we had laws that would benefit the buys like the veteran loan programs have ( buying lower API points, refinancing for free or greatly reduced, more secure loaners ). More taxes on quick flips, short term rentals, and multiple houses owned by single investor(s). Stop people from looking at houses as an investment but as a universal necessity.
No, like 90% of the problem with zoning is restricting residential density to single-family houses only.
As for the industrial building vs. minority neighborhoods issue you're talking about, industry has hardly been encroaching anything in decades. It's really more the opposite: the need to remediate polluted former industrial sites (especially before new housing is built on top of them), as well as holding what relatively little industry actually still remains more accountable for the pollution it emits. That's not even really a zoning problem so much as it is an environmental regulation problem.
directly build housing and sell it for cost so the system renews itself and brings down housing costs.
That would require a lot of red tape for the government. Doing a spacex model could work though. Pick a industry leader and partner with the us government to aid in the whole process.
Two things,
-
You will have to partner with, at minimal, a decent owner. Require that only union approved works build the product. Require union works to make up a percentage of the board. Require a minimum percentage of revenue to be invested in innovation and research.
-
Require social, economic, and environmental research to be the driving force and implement their recommendations. Lay out their goals (i.e. decrease the gap between white and minority ownership, CO2 reduction / neutral production, bloated budgets / unnecessary spending).
People need to look at houses as a universal necessity , not an investment.
I mean thats fine to me. I want them to make real estate one of the poorest payout investments. Lucky to make over cost.
Spacex model? Give billions of dollars to a ketamine addicted narcissist asshole? No thanks
-
Lower regulations for building houses and encourage the construction of houses. Also build a subway near the suburbs to reduce car use.
There is a lot of unused land because there are no basic services or they do not meet demand. This should also be encouraged.
I think it's important to be clear about what "lower regulations" should mean. Loosening safety or energy efficiency standards would be bad, but eliminating minimum parking requirements would be good.
(Parking really is the issue here, by the way. For example, an 800 ft2 2-bedroom apartment is forced to become effectively 1200 ft2 if code requires 1 parking space per bedroom, singlehandedly driving up costs by more than 50% because concrete parking decks are more expensive per square foot than living space is.)
why low density? High density is rediculously overpriced.
Unfortunately, this proposal is not going to change anything. The market will raise its prices and more money will be siphoned away.
What's missing in the current housing market is regulations to strictly ensure only humans—not private equity firms—can purchase homes. And if you own more than one home, your property taxes increase for each extra home you own.
I really hate how what you're saying is so goddamn common sense and yet people will drag their heels supporting it, partially because some selfishly think they may be an oppressor one day...
Each day gets harder than the last, I swear.
Each generation since the Baby Boomers has had a worse life, mostly as a direct result of Baby Boomers.
Housing has gone off the rails. Everything needs to be done to fix this.
Either we get affordable code-compliant housing or we get affordable shanty towns.
A lot of places appear to be trying to go for option C: persecuting homelessness in order to bring back Victorian-style workhouses and expand prison slavery.
Unfortunately you're correct. Even if not everyone is funneled into the prison system, their belongings get taken away and/destroyed. Some even lose beloved pets. I imagine it's extremely demoralizing having your life broken down to zero and having to rebuild again and again.
This is the same shit as the old shit.
Hold there feet to the fire (not a threat ). We let people get in office and allow them to slide bc they are "team". Keep pushing for more progressive programs.
The US average voting turn out for elections are low. We need to be more active. That is how we got these broken laws. Racist and oppressive people vote, EVERY TIME. If you don't see that person, then run for a local spot. That is actual change.
Reuters - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Reuters:
MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Very High - United Kingdom
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/harris-puts-housing-center-economic-pitch-us-voters-2024-08-26/