I definitely agree that the problem with my argument is that it’s too theoretical in that “Econ 101” way, although I think it’s probably inevitable that any attempt at prediction will suffer a bit in that regard. That said, it make some rough sense to me, and I think your counterarguments also suffer in the same way, where you aren’t just making bare assertions.
That sounds more critical than I intend, because I think both our arguments have similar problems in this regard, it’s just kind of ¯_(ツ)_/¯
But, that in itself is relevant to me, in the sense that I become more conservative about proposed big policy changes in the face of greater uncertainty. So, part of my motivation in making the argument that I did was that I think the alternative I proposed is less radical, and so (imo) less risky.
This is always the dilemma found by the stereotypical ‘white moderate’. Big policy changes always come with a side helping of uncertainty. Avoiding uncertainty is actively supporting the powers-that-be.
Instead times of uncertainty are the times possible change. Now, right now today, is a once in a live time opportunity to do the right things, just when it matters the most. If not now… then literally never for maybe everyone alive today. It’s pedal to the metal time.
There’s a risk either way.
The risk of reformism is that it trades off a finite and always precarious gain (ex: more sec8 funding) for strengthening the very system you are fighting against (sec8 is a subsidy to the landlords)… making it harder, long run, to achieve your goals.
Yes, this is a problem I noted before. I suggested that there are alternatives (still in the genre of increasing public housing), although I also think it’s a problem I could probably live with. On that note:
Biden wants to make the federal Section 8 housing voucher program an entitlement, like SNAP or Medicaid, so that all eligible families would get help — a huge change from the current situation where 75 percent of low-income families who meet the criteria for help don’t actually get any. This is a longtime goal of anti-poverty wonks that until recently didn’t seem to be on the radar of Democratic Party politicians but has gained considerable steam over the past two years.
Obviously the reason most who qualify don’t get it is because of lack of funding. The waiting list in LA County is over a decade. There are different kinds of Section 8 as well. Some of it is a voucher that goes with the tenant (though is paid to the landlord) and some of it goes with the building (I believe this only goes with non-profit owner/sponsors).
I think the government might be able to spend less money if it used those Section 8 payments to buy condo units - paying a mortgage - function as the landlord for the tenants - rent at 30% of income - and then give the unit to someone when it’s paid off.
“In ten years,” Irizarry tells us, “we lost nearly 80 percent of our housing to fires. Nearly a quarter of a million people lost their homes. But we did not burn the South Bronx. In fact, we saved it.”
File under: the landlords “create” urban planning.
The absentee landlords had the Bronx burned.
To be clear this was a guy renting a room in another man’s house, not someone renting an apartment. The tenant appears to believe himself to be a “sovereign citizen”.
10k avoidable deaths! If we had abolished landlords back in March, we could have saved 10k lives. It is well past the time to end the landlords’ system that places their profits>the health and well being of our fellow humans.
Proud of these people standing in solidarity with their community. The cops on the other hand…well if kicking people out of their homes during a pandemic is considered to be a part of “protect and serve”, then those words have lost all meaning.
I know this was a contentious topic, but maybe people can talk about this without being dicks to each other this time? Anyway, I wanted to what people would say about this:
OWNERSHIP REINVENTED
For the first time, investors around the globe can buy into the US real estate market through fully-compliant, fractional, tokenized ownership. Powered by blockchain.
I’m not sure it’s fundamentally any different than a REIT, but it is tokenized and powered by blockchain!
Seems like a standard securitisation ‘scam’, in that it masks real assets behind an abstract right to a regular fixed income.
In this example it’s relatively easy to see that the company managing the whole process is now crucial to the tokens functioning as investments. When they’re seen as a ‘good’ company then all is well and they will be able to increase their management fees. If there are doubts about their performances then almost regardless of the worth of the real estate then the tokens will be devalued as the fixed income will become uncertain. That the LLCs will be able to independently manage the houses in the event of collapse seems clear fiction.
Once you’ve got that dynamic you can skim money when the going is good and exit when the going is bad, safe in the knowledge you’ll be well placed to buy back the actual assets for a song when the party’s over. The renters are the main source of money to get skimmed.
This is kind of like what I tried to describe (much) earlier.