-34
Harris supports a 44.6% tax on Americans for selling their homes: Report
(americanmilitarynews.com)
this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2024
-34 points (17.3% liked)
Conservative
382 readers
46 users here now
A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff
-
Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
-
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
-
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.
A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm all for reducing the incentive to use housing as tools for investment. Houses should not be used as people's retirement nest egg.
I actually don’t believe there’s any mechanism by which large-scale home ownership (one entity owning many homes) affects market prices, unless it’s so extreme that it’s down to one owner owning all the real estate.
From my macroeconomics classes (which were admittedly 25 years ago) I don’t remember anything about a relationship between firm size and the price of goods.
I think the thing that’s really causing housing prices to skyrocket is the constant artificial constraint on new housing construction, which causes permantly-insufficient supply, which makes prices high.
When there's a company with $1 billion dollars in cash competing with people's needing to take out 25 year mortgages at 5% interest, and the company sees it as a way to profit, the company will outbid the individual every single time and drive up market prices.
Individuals buying with the added cost of interest will never be able to compete with corporations that's have cash on hand and can make a profit by renting out the house.
The more homes a company owns, the more capital it warms to buy more homes.
You don't need one company in the country, you just need a few in a single desirable city.
Why am I curious about its real intention of it. If it is just for investment properties, I can support it. If it's for all homes sales, I couldn't support it. It would crush the middle class as they try to move up in properties.