/lit/ - Literature

>>16940816
>>Less regulations on building
buildings look ugly enough as it is, don't make it worse

>>16940816
This is a literature board.
try >>>/pol/

>>16940816
Personally in huge favor of the third one. Hard to afford a home in your city when there’s roughly a 100 million Chinese people competing against you just to rent it out purely for profit.

>>16940833
Posted it there, got zero replies. Lit is the best board for any kind of meaningful discussion.

>>16940846
Suck our dicks fat faggot

>>16940816
The real problem is that housing is the primary investment for 90% of people. The average person's net worth and ability to retire depends almost entirely on the value of their house. Working to lower the cost of real estate would be good for businesses and renters and help the economy be more efficient but it's political suicide.
Try to tell some boomer who's house has gone up 400% in value since 1980 and who's depending on selling their house that's artificially inflated in price for retirement that you want to collapse the housing market.

San Francisco is the perfect example of this. NIMBYs refuse any high density housing because it will hurt their home value and they can shut development down completely through lawsuits. When I visited it, I was shocked at how low density it actually was compared to land prices. The only economically feasible developments with SF prices are eight story apartment buildings but the average residential unit was a two story single family house. Of course, they aren't single family homes anymore because people can only afford to live there with 5 roommates. This is the most expensive real estate market in the country, more expensive than Manhattan, and it looks like this 10 minutes away from the city center.
Regulations and restrictive zoning laws are the problem but homeowners are disproportionately powerful compared to renters so those laws will never change.

>>16940816
Yea mods keep this open, /lit should be the board for meaningfull discussion.

>>16940816
It's true that inflation sucks for hardworking and frugal people who are trying to save up money. It incentivizes debt.

Mortgages for houses should be illegal, that will force most people to rent and the price of buying a house will go down drastically and only frugal hardworking professionals will be able to own a house.

Part of the problem could also be seen as a LACK of government overreach. Housing isn't a commodity that can be ignored if the prices are out of reach, like clothing its considered a necessity, however there's little regulation outside of the market on how much one can or will charge for rent, leasing, or cash purchases. But the market for housing is a fickle thing wherein various interest groups can push would-be homeowners out of the picture or even out of the city. There's little to no regulation keeping an (((investor))) from pricing out a city's residents to appeal to Californians who would gladly spend 1,200 a month on a studio apartment.

>>16940846
Pol is so shit

>>16940816
Wtf no Netherlands on the list? Are we poor?

>>16941007
>28. Portugal 44k
>33. Germany 35k
>34. Netherlands 31k
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wealth_per_adult

>>16940816
>The 6 lessons of economics Ludwig von Mises.
>Anatomy of the state - Rothbard.
>The anti-capitalist mentality - Mises
>The origin of money - Carl Menger.
>The great American depression - Rothbard.
>The law - bastiat.
>The euro tragedy - philipp bagus

>>16940899
Looks like we need monarchy.

>>16941007
You guys have a lot of debt because of the government encouraging mortages hard

>>16940846
If off topic politics threads like these are allowed then the exact same detritus that makes /pol/ unusable will migrate here and shit it up. In that case, it will no longer be able to have the very discussions you want to have right now. This violates the first formulation of the categorical imperative, as you cannot will it be a universal law. Further, it will ruin it for the rest of us. So restrain yourself, read a book, and talk about that instead.

>>16941046
The categorical imperative is retarded, why would you treat everybody as equal lel, read some Nietzsche, kanttard.

And also don't be a fuckin Karen, you should just contribute to this thread or gtfo. You are making a /pol jannie tier post.

>>16941018
Thanks anon, I will start reading these. I've never thought about it before, but those libertarians are onto something. I want to learn more about how government and fed jack prices up. With my friends we tried to approximately estimated how much lower would housing prices be with less regulation, gold/silver standard and free market interest rates. It could 2x, 3x lower than it is now. When I think about it I feel betrayed. I might be paying 3x rent and extra cost on everything I buy and I will pay taxes when I graduate and start working. This is ridiculous.

>>16940816
Is Switzerland actually a nice place to live in? I'm thinking of leaving the U.S. for somewhere in Europe, though not sure I prefer Germany or Switzerland.

>>16941062
Knows he does wrong and is still recalcitrant in the face of correction. Self-interested scum who cares nothing about the consequences of his actions and just wants to use the board like rag before throwing it soiled into the pile. It's no wonder you find libertarianism so compelling, maybe pick up a book by Ayn Rand next. Read Nietzsche? what are you, 14? Get the fuck off my board you opportunistic tourist.

>>16941007
You have incomes similar to those on top of the list but you squander it on frivolities, the laws and culture encourage debt too.
A bit like the united states where incomes are larger than almost anywhere except small oil or trade states but even the upper middle class is drowning in denbts because they live on credit.

>>16940816
Why is Australia so wealthy?

>>16941292
30 years of economic growth due to resource extraction. Mining boom offset the 2008 GFC so we probably endured that shitstorm better than other first world country.

>>16941292
Mining, real estate exploding due to capital flight from Chinamen getting money out of the party's reach.

>>16940816
>Libertarian guest briefly said that progressive land tax is more favorable than property tax, but they didn't stay on it?
Based. Land tax is best tax. Reminder to read Progress and Poverty by Henry George. Reminder that /lit/ is a geolibertarian board.

>>16941292
It is essentially because house prices are so high. This pushes up the "wealth" of the average person who owns a property. Most of the wealth belongs to Boomers and maybe Gen-Xers who lucked out and got hit up the arse by this rainbow: >>16941328

>>16941128
>comparing Nietzsche and Ayn Rand
>not being retarded
pick one

bump.

>>16940912
When will we return to the days that usury was a sin?

>>16940816
>What are other ways to do it?
Reduce the demand. In most countries only properties in/around cities are expensive. Most people are not forced to go into the cities. Invest in local alternatives.
Either way all the four ways are fine. Implementing them properly is difficult in a democracy which is controlled by money.

>>16940816
>Libertarian guest briefly said that progressive land tax is more favorable than property tax, but they didn't stay on it? Why is it so?
If you tax buildings the cost of building goes up, so the suppy of building should be lower than it would otherwise be. The supply of land doesn't change: charging people for land won't make people create less land than they would otherwise because nobody is creating land anyway.

That is the basic georgist (non-ethical) argument.

Posner and Weyl would probably argue that Harberger taxation (everyone names the selling price on their own property, the tax is a % of that and basically every single individual has imminent domain power) would add so much allocative efficiency that would make up for the added cost to building.

>>16940953
rent controls don't work, there is plenty of research on this.

>>16940816
This is off topic.

As for Libertarianism. Or really any ideology that you truly sink your little teeth into. It can sound good if you accept the judgement of its theorists and refuse to think about the implications. Many expert economists and scientists think it's imperative to regulate business more. Yeah, inflation has gone up. Wages have not. Productivity has skyrocketed. Libertarianism is Neoliberalism 2.0 and is not fit to address the most concerning aspects of our society. Corporations already have far too much authority. We shouldn't give them more. Corporations write around 90% of legislation that gets passed.(google it). Libertarianism was shilled hard by the Koch brothers. The best thing you could do for the American worker full stop is increase hos wages. It would be easy at current without even inviting much infaltion according to MANY economists. The money is being made. It's not going to the worker.

>>16941777
Since this is lit:

Progress and Poverty is Henry George's (georgism's namesake) masterwork on land value taxation.

Radical Markets is Posner and Weyl's book on applying Harberger taxation to most assets. And it's VERY radical*, even too radical for me who takes up any chance to mention Harberger taxation.

>>16941817
Thanks, I will start reading Progress and Poverty. I've looked it up and it looks very interesting, these are things that I've never thought about. Also, Harberger taxation sounds very interesting. It is a way to keep the market honest, but I have some questions about it. Hopefully Radical Markets have answers.

>>16940816
>>16940846
Fuck you.