Thread

1. soonnow · 1789971698 · focus · HN ↗

   To add a b it of context. They do not want to confiscate housing. They do want to pay landlords, though below current (very high) rates. Also this would only apply to private real-estate companies not individual owners.

   And they can't govern alone, so I think it's unlikely that this plan is actually implemented as originally planned. The likely coalition would contain 3 parties.

   1. dirasieb · 1789972590 · focus · HN ↗

      >it's not confiscation, you're just forced to sell at a price i decide is fair

      sound logic

      1. 4gotunameagain · 1789972887 · focus · HN ↗

         The "free market" (which has been demonstrated to not be free at all) has no place in basic needs such as housing.

         Rent extraction is utterly counterproductive for a society.

         Housing should not be a commodity.

         1. spankalee · 1789973591 · focus · HN ↗

            Housing should be a commodity. Commodities are fungible, plentiful, and easily tradable.

            Housing right now is the opposite of a commodity: it's a boutique investment for individuals whose price is propped up by regulations that artificially limit supply.

            1. repsilat · 1789974469 · focus · HN ↗

               Yes, the grandparent scored an own goal with their aside

               >> The "free market" (which has been demonstrated to not be free at all)

               The Berlin rental market suffers under strong government intervention, and would benefit from being much freer.

               1. 4gotunameagain · 1789976232 · focus · HN ↗

                  This is not true. Two more strong government interventions that would benefit the housing market:

                  - Tax empty flats to death

                  - Disallow corporate ownership of residential property

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.