Better for renters and massively better for the investors and speculators lining up for this gold rush.
-
-
Replying to @coolgrey @chrsdcook and
Yeah, the people whose jobs consist of building housing will benefit from legalising the construction of more housing. As a person who needs someone to build housing I'm fine with this.
1 reply 1 retweet 7 likes -
Replying to @johnleemk @chrsdcook and
The benefits to actual construction workers are fairly limited and short-term. The benefits to investors and hedge funds and the like are massive and permit and likely to have a profound impact on the experience of "home" for many, many Californians.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @coolgrey @chrsdcook and
Other people who experience massive and profound benefits: Californians who get homes to live in. If you want to punish investors and hedge funds, there are ways to do so that don't involve banning housing construction.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @johnleemk @chrsdcook and
If you want to build housing, there are ways to do so that don't involve creating such windfalls for the wealthy and setting up a bad pattern of control of housing.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @coolgrey @johnleemk and
The current situation is a giant fucking windfall for anyone who owns existing housing in CA. It’s like someone is writing a giant 300K check to single family homeowners in SF every year.http://www.beyondchron.org/cities-tax-huge-profits-stopping-housing/ …
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @johnleemk and
Much rather have windfalls, if any, go to local families than hedge funds. But obviously we need to change the current system, which will reduce that windfall to families. I am perfectly okay with that.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @coolgrey @johnleemk and
What if the hedge funds increasingly own single family homes in California? https://shelterforce.org/2015/07/29/reo_to_rental_wall_streets_latest_idea_hurts_california_communities/ … What if the real estate developers’ investors are public pension funds like
@CalPERS?https://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/news/2018/02/06/exclusive-costs-are-stalling-anew-soma-housing.html …2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @johnleemk and
This is actually a real issue and gets at the inadequacy of the "SFH" language. We need a way to distinguish clearly between investment property and homes.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @coolgrey @kimmaicutler and
The picture in SoCal seems particularly disturbing as it sounds like a significant number of homes in lower income areas were taken over by banks in the wake of the financial crisis. Those banks are looking at potential huge windfalls from
#SB8271 reply 1 retweet 4 likes
They get a windfall in either scenario (absent property tax reform). Constrained housing supply = get to jack up rents. Or upzoning = can sell land for more overall (but likely less on a per unit basis). But in the second scenario, there are more homes for people to live in.
-
-
Replying to @kimmaicutler @coolgrey and
So much this! It's not like if SB827 fails the rentier class will stop getting wealthier.
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.