• mysticpickle@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    This is a band aid size solution on the gaping wound problem of housing shortage. She should really be putting her time into coming up with an answer to increasing housing supply

    • FatCrab@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Increasing housing supply is explicitly part of her announced plan. Are you under the impression that this was the entirety of her announced economic plan?

  • nadram@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    That’s a terrible idea. The real life effect is that prices will simply go up. You need to force down real estate prices in general, and offer very low interest rates for first time buyers.

    • Crow_Thief@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      At worst, youre partially right. Maybe they’d go up 10K, but certainly not 25K. That’s just not how markets work. It’s the same argument as saying UBI will increase prices - yes, it will, but not by more than or as much as the UBI is. If everybody else sells their home at $25K more, you can sell yours in a month by going down to $15K more than before.

      • nadram@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        I agree, and i didn’t say it will increase prices by 25k. Still think this can be tackled in better ways. Low interest rates over a 20-25 year loan can save you much more than 25k. Edit: let’s ban corporate from buying up blocks of residential areas. It won’t cost you any tax money and will immediately drop the prices

        • Crow_Thief@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          29 days ago

          Yeah, that’s the real solution. We have to ban any one entity owning more than 2-3 residential properties. The $25K is simply a decent stop gap until we can actually make that law happen, because our capitalist overlords would never allow it.

  • Clbull@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    We had a help to buy scheme in the UK similar to what Harris is proposing. Spoiler warning: it didn’t help.

    Only thing that will stem the demand is a massive house construction scheme and outright building new cities.

    • Smoogs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      27 days ago

      You don’t need more cities when there’s about 7 times the empty, perfectly functional living quarters for the amount of homelessness.

      More houses is not the answer. There are plenty. Making more just make greedy capitalists more fuel.

      Use what we got more efficiently.

    • laverabe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’d argue we don’t necessarily need more homes. I think what most cities need is really to end zoning.

      There is more than enough commercial and industrial vacant properties over the US that could very feasibly be turned into residential housing to house every person ten times over.

      Zoning really is the problem because developers are essentially being forced to build unwalkable communities. You’re just not allowed in many cities to buy old warehouse space and develop it into housing or to build small businesses (groceries, shops, etc) in areas zoned residential.

      Ending/reforming zoning would solve so many issues… (I say /reforming because there are limits, most people don’t want to live 10ft from a factory). But I hardly hear anyone talking about it whether on Lemmy or in the media… but it seems like it would fix so many issues.

      • SSJMarx@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        I remember when I went to Germany and saw apartments with stores on the ground floor, blew my child mind at the time but it’s so obvious it hurts.

  • Pika@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    can’t wait for all homes to go up 25k in response. Without purchase control this is useless

    • AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      “Can’t wait for burgers to cost $25 because the minimum wage went up”

      • Pika@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        I mean we are almost there tbh, it’s not due to min wage though it’s due to producer greed. Super high cost for producers means super high ingredient cost, plus the shops greed means burgers are now over 4$ for fast food and > 12$ for actual burgers. 16$ for 2 burgers and a thing of fries at McDonald’s.

        The reason I know it’s not the wage but greed, if that was the case the price would be stagnant in states closer to federal min wage, but those states are the similar pricing as well. For example, currently for 2 bacon mcdoubles a large fry and a large lemonade at mcdonalds Huston texas; min wage $7.25; order cost: 12.56 Maine: min wage: $14.25; order cost: $15.76

        Yes there is a difference in price but, the fact that one order makes up almost the difference in pay for a single employee at the establishment. The price is marked way higher than wage markup, it’s companies using it as an excuse to raise prices

  • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Just build more houses. Costs are out of control. I’m in my 40s, and have a good down payment saved up, but prices and interest rates mean I’m still priced out of buying a home.

  • SSJMarx@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    As long as they don’t add any “if you own a business in a disadvantaged community for two years” BS to the end of it, neat policy. Would be great if they paired it with something that will bring prices down while helping people who aren’t in the “can potentially afford a house” income bracket, like a massive federal public housing program.