How do we solve the housing crisis in America???
Most Popular Reply
Henry ClarkPro Member
Developer · Member since 2020 · 4k+ posts · 4k+ votesAlways start with the numbers. What market? How many? What is rental cost? What is ownership cost? What group of people?
By renting trailers you may be causing the problem. By selling houses to them you may be causing the problem. What are your numbers?
Approach the question backwards. How would I increase the number of people who can’t afford housing? Dissect the issue.
360,000,000 people.
How many can’t afford housing. What do you mean by can’t afford housing? Can’t buy? Can’t rent?
Why is it bad that x% can’t afford housing? Unless you’re homeless you have housing. Are you talking about homeless? Define the who.
160 Replies
- Member since 2023 · 52 posts · 43 votes2y
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Account Closed:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Account Closed:
Quote from @Henry Clark:
Always start with the numbers. What market? How many? What is rental cost? What is ownership cost? What group of people?
By renting trailers you may be causing the problem. By selling houses to them you may be causing the problem. What are your numbers?
Approach the question backwards. How would I increase the number of people who can’t afford housing? Dissect the issue.
360,000,000 people.
How many can’t afford housing. What do you mean by can’t afford housing? Can’t buy? Can’t rent?
Why is it bad that x% can’t afford housing? Unless you’re homeless you have housing. Are you talking about homeless? Define the who.
Or we could just admit that the realtors, lenders, and investors milking people dry and exploiting every law, ordinance and misguided government policy they could get their hands on was the problem.
Seems like you are anti capitalism.
Capitalism strives to maximize profits within the laws and regulations. This implies realtors, lender, and investors strive to maximize profit no different than the butcher, plumber, electrician, etc. The market will dictate their ability to earn money. Those that recognize how to build wealth often will, but they could choose to be philanthropic. They should not feel guilty making what they can anymore than the plumber should feel guilty about charging a rate that the market will pay.
There are communist countries that people are not paid on the market value of efforts. I have an aunt that was a national ballerina and her husband ( my uncle) was a film director in a former communist country. In the US these skills would have provided good/great wealth. They lived a fine life style, but not far above the lifestyle of lay people.
I have a friend that when various communist countries converted to capitalistic markets tried to hire some of these workers. The workers were used to not producing. He could not use them.I choose to be a fan of capitalism. I choose to be on BP to help budding RE investors succeed. Why are you here?
We haven't had actual capitalism in this country for decades, with everyone running to the gov to get bailed out everytime they screw up or need help. So spare me the capitalism crap in defense of greed run amok.
Bottom line is, the OP asked about solving the housing crisis in America. Some choose to argue there isn't one to begin with. For those who feel there is, you might want to look at the people involved in pumping up the prices to absurdity over the last decade.
Not hard to figure out who there were/are, and squawking about capitalism like a parrot to justify it all does zero to address this situation.
Bs. Capitalism occurs when you recognize the opportunities. The bailouts do not negate capitalism. Capitalists recognize opportunities of low interests rates, government policies, bailouts, etc. it is what capitalists do.
Those that whine about capitalist leveraging the policies are depicting an anti capitalist perspective.
Using the word greed again depicts an anti capitalist perspective. Maximizing profit is what capitalist do. Any philanthropic tendencies should be separate from a business/profit perspective.
I question if you understand the site you are on and why most people are on this site.
Best wishes
This forum doesn't stand as a monolith to your opinions on "capitalism", and if you don't like dissent, tough ****. Welcome to earth.
Will agree on one thing you said- "Maximizing profit is what capitalist do". Thats right. And thats why regulation exists because we can't just leave the outcomes of our lives up to the byproduct of maximizing profit.
Maximizing profit is exactly what the Realtors, lenders and investors/speculators have done in a rampant fashion, and back to the original question posed by the OP- thats the root of the problem you speak of.
Oh my god....what a racist trope.... yeah, its all the immigrants. Lets round them all up in box cars and send them to..... why does that sound familiar? They are all criminal and free loaders trying to take advantage of our country....
Yeah its the immigrants "stealing our jobs".... the immigrants that come for a better life, fleeing poverty and violence. Packing a family of 10 in a house that should have 4 people in it. Working ungodly hours, doing jobs no one wants to do, saving $$, opening their own store/business to support their family while still sending $$ to their family back home.... such losers.....
No its not the poor white families living on welfare and government assistance..... its not the hedge funds buying up every unit that hits the market....buying huge areas of land and then not building on it..... not the corporate landlords continually raising rents and squeezing every dollar out of every tenant. Not the corporations busting unions and driving wages to stagnant levels...... not the corporations reaping record profits and crying about inflation and how they cant possibly raise staff salaries..... nope... none of that.... its the immigrants......
Yeah.... lets deport 10 million immigrants and see what happens to our economy then.... brilliant idea
- Member since 2023 · 52 posts · 43 votes2y
"what a racist trope"
Thats a distraction. They can all be white people from an impoverished nation and his point remains the same.
Problem with what he said is he seems content to blame the whole thing on them and not acknowledge the bigger fish regarding the issue.
Quote from @Theresa Harris:
I agree with you; however, I would also look at lifestyle. Some of the people making decent $$ are also pretty good at spending it vs saving for a down payment for a house. That is a personal choice, but is a factor in their ability to afford (to buy) a house.Quote from @Ned J.:
This is a really complicated issue....
Affordability is based on 2 major factors...... how much money do I make and what is the price of the units in the area. So am I underpaid or are the prices too damn high. What we are seeing now is a lot of the younger generation making pretty decent $$ by most standards and still not being able to afford housing...... that new.
@Bruce Woodruff..... while "want" has some major influence on where people decide to live, so does necessity..... what do you do for a living? job availability.....are there services that you need that require you to live close? We cant all just live wherever and make it by. Move to a lower cost housing market..... and there is a decent chance your job pay is going to be substantially less too. It's more complicated than "just move somewhere cheaper"
I agree that some of this really comes down to money managements... people make BAD choices with their $$....BUT there are quite a few hard working double income young families that are pretty prudent with their $$ that still cant afford housing. It didnt use to be that way. Its almost become a requirement to be a double income household to afford a house now and even that has become increasingly harder even with that. The increased in cost of living has far outpaced the rise in average income, so the plan of "just make more $$ and save more" isnt as impactful as it used to be.
Quote from @Account Closed:
"what a racist trope"
Thats a distraction. They can all be white people from an impoverished nation and his point remains the same.
Problem with what he said is he seems content to blame the whole thing on them and not acknowledge the bigger fish regarding the issue.
But its not a distraction..... its an ideology. When people scream about deporting
illegal immigrants" they aren't talking about people that look or talk like them- Member since 2023 · 52 posts · 43 votes2y
Quote from @Ned J.:
Quote from @Account Closed:
"what a racist trope"
Thats a distraction. They can all be white people from an impoverished nation and his point remains the same.
Problem with what he said is he seems content to blame the whole thing on them and not acknowledge the bigger fish regarding the issue.
But its not a distraction..... its an ideology. When people scream about deporting
illegal immigrants" they aren't talking about people that look or talk like themNot always, and not universally. If I present you with a line up of 5 Brits and 5 poles, and you can tell me who is who accurately, good on ya. Not looking like them wasn't what pissed British off about Polish workers in their country.
Some people just don't like the concept of being a tax paying citizen, and having anyone who wants just able to walk in and squat in their country. Not just in the US.
They are also not the main problem regarding the OP's question.
- Real Estate Broker · Minneapolis, MN · Member since 2011 · 5k+ posts · 6k+ votes2y
Quote from @Account Closed:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Account Closed:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Account Closed:
Quote from @Henry Clark:
....Maximizing profit is exactly what the Realtors.... ...have done in a rampant fashion.... ...thats the root of the problem you speak of.
Help me to understand this, I narrowed it to just the 1, for simplicity sake.
So your saying the whole housing problem, it's agent's, agent's who represent sellers and buyer's who some way some how have created the issues at hand.
How? And vs what?
An agent, representing a seller, YES 100% the job is to work for the BEST outcome of the seller, full-stop. Getting top dollar buyers will pay with best term's buyers will give. That is the job, literally and legally.
The listing agent has 0 control what buyers will or won't do, 0. So how is it the agent's "fault"? What else are they to do? Tell a seller "nope, sorry, I won't let you sell for that much, it's not affordable enough, your going to take $50k less and LIKE IT"?
AND, on opposite side, an agent acting for buyer's IS the counter-weight. Doing everything possible to get BUYERS there best deal, lowest price, best terms. So how in the hell is a buyers agent at fault of unaffordability? There fighting to make things MORE affordable.
It's a bizarre argument that only makes sense if picture it falling out the mouth of a rampant COMMUNIST who has zero knowledge or experience of and with real estate agent's.
Is that the case here? Are you a communist just pist over any/all things "Capitalist scum"?
Because I, as an agent, and EVERY agent I know, would LOVE a WAY more "affordable" market. We make the most on VOLUME. A $50k difference doesn't mean much more $ for us, our motive is VOLUME. And a better, more affordable market, means way more volume and that directly translates into more $ for the agent.
So you couldn't be more wrong, agent's WANT a more affordable market. We want it zinging along for EVERYONE. Agent's motive is affordability not stagflation.
- Member since 2023 · 52 posts · 43 votes2y
Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Account Closed:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Account Closed:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Account Closed:
Quote from @Henry Clark:
....Maximizing profit is exactly what the Realtors.... ...have done in a rampant fashion.... ...thats the root of the problem you speak of.
Help me to understand this, I narrowed it to just the 1, for simplicity sake.
So your saying the whole housing problem, it's agent's, agent's who represent sellers and buyer's who some way some how have created the issues at hand.
How? And vs what?
An agent, representing a seller, YES 100% the job is to work for the BEST outcome of the seller, full-stop. Getting top dollar buyers will pay with best term's buyers will give. That is the job, literally and legally.
The listing agent has 0 control what buyers will or won't do, 0. So how is it the agent's "fault"? What else are they to do? Tell a seller "nope, sorry, I won't let you sell for that much, it's not affordable enough, your going to take $50k less and LIKE IT"?
AND, on opposite side, an agent acting for buyer's IS the counter-weight. Doing everything possible to get BUYERS there best deal, lowest price, best terms. So how in the hell is a buyers agent at fault of unaffordability? There fighting to make things MORE affordable.
It's a bizarre argument that only makes sense if picture it falling out the mouth of a rampant COMMUNIST who has zero knowledge or experience of and with real estate agent's.
Is that the case here? Are you a communist just pist over any/all things "Capitalist scum"?
Because I, as an agent, and EVERY agent I know, would LOVE a WAY more "affordable" market. We make the most on VOLUME. A $50k difference doesn't mean much more $ for us, our motive is VOLUME. And a better, more affordable market, means way more volume and that directly translates into more $ for the agent.
So you couldn't be more wrong, agent's WANT a more affordable market. We want it zinging along for EVERYONE. Agent's motive is affordability not stagflation.
As soon as you used the word communist, you told me everything I need to know about you.
"An agent, representing a seller, YES 100% the job is to work for the BEST outcome of the seller, full-stop. Getting top dollar buyers will pay with best term's buyers will give."
Yep. Agreed, thats what you'll do alright. Brewing up bidding wars, highest and best, ect.
"AND, on opposite side, an agent acting for buyer's IS the counter-weight. Doing everything possible to get BUYERS there best deal, lowest price, best terms."You know better than that, and so do we. I just dropped my douchebag agent who was more focused on her 2.5% than my interests as a buyer, as of last week. The inspection came back looking like **** and she fought tooth and nail to pursuade me to stay in the deal and not pull out or ask for the credits.
So while you Realtors are motivated by commissions on both sides, with plenty of lenders you can refer your clients to to help them overpay, while you take advantage of their own greed/ignorance/desperation, and a government and central bank facilitating the whole thing for you over the last decade-
ya right, Reators had no hand in the surge of home prices vs wages across the country.
Quote from @Account Closed:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Account Closed:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Account Closed:
Quote from @Henry Clark:
Always start with the numbers. What market? How many? What is rental cost? What is ownership cost? What group of people?
By renting trailers you may be causing the problem. By selling houses to them you may be causing the problem. What are your numbers?
Approach the question backwards. How would I increase the number of people who can’t afford housing? Dissect the issue.
360,000,000 people.
How many can’t afford housing. What do you mean by can’t afford housing? Can’t buy? Can’t rent?
Why is it bad that x% can’t afford housing? Unless you’re homeless you have housing. Are you talking about homeless? Define the who.
Or we could just admit that the realtors, lenders, and investors milking people dry and exploiting every law, ordinance and misguided government policy they could get their hands on was the problem.
Seems like you are anti capitalism.
Capitalism strives to maximize profits within the laws and regulations. This implies realtors, lender, and investors strive to maximize profit no different than the butcher, plumber, electrician, etc. The market will dictate their ability to earn money. Those that recognize how to build wealth often will, but they could choose to be philanthropic. They should not feel guilty making what they can anymore than the plumber should feel guilty about charging a rate that the market will pay.
There are communist countries that people are not paid on the market value of efforts. I have an aunt that was a national ballerina and her husband ( my uncle) was a film director in a former communist country. In the US these skills would have provided good/great wealth. They lived a fine life style, but not far above the lifestyle of lay people.
I have a friend that when various communist countries converted to capitalistic markets tried to hire some of these workers. The workers were used to not producing. He could not use them.I choose to be a fan of capitalism. I choose to be on BP to help budding RE investors succeed. Why are you here?
We haven't had actual capitalism in this country for decades, with everyone running to the gov to get bailed out everytime they screw up or need help. So spare me the capitalism crap in defense of greed run amok.
Bottom line is, the OP asked about solving the housing crisis in America. Some choose to argue there isn't one to begin with. For those who feel there is, you might want to look at the people involved in pumping up the prices to absurdity over the last decade.
Not hard to figure out who there were/are, and squawking about capitalism like a parrot to justify it all does zero to address this situation.
Bs. Capitalism occurs when you recognize the opportunities. The bailouts do not negate capitalism. Capitalists recognize opportunities of low interests rates, government policies, bailouts, etc. it is what capitalists do.
Those that whine about capitalist leveraging the policies are depicting an anti capitalist perspective.
Using the word greed again depicts an anti capitalist perspective. Maximizing profit is what capitalist do. Any philanthropic tendencies should be separate from a business/profit perspective.
I question if you understand the site you are on and why most people are on this site.
Best wishes
This forum doesn't stand as a monolith to your opinions on "capitalism", and if you don't like dissent, tough ****. Welcome to earth.
Will agree on one thing you said- "Maximizing profit is what capitalist do". Thats right. And thats why regulation exists because we can't just leave the outcomes of our lives up to the byproduct of maximizing profit.
Maximizing profit is exactly what the Realtors, lenders and investors/speculators have done in a rampant fashion, and back to the original question posed by the OP- thats the root of the problem you speak of.
No issues with open debate.
My intent was to Point out that what you indicated was not capitalism is exactly what capitalism is. It now appears you back tracked on that part of your statement so we are in agreement.
Seeing we appear to be in agreement that capitalism includes maximizing profits, I assume we are also in agreement that your perspective about the problem being realtors, lenders, and investors milking people dry (ie maximizing profits) is anti-capitalism. Nothing wrong with that, but recognize it.
The fact that you are on this forum with your views is in contrast to the bigger pocket’ stated goal (look at “about us”): “Our goal here at BiggerPockets is to help ordinary people like you build wealth through real estate. Specifically, we want to assist 1 million members in building 1 million dollars in wealth. You help us work towards our goal whenever you make progress towards yours.” The site has as its stated goal to have its members build wealth which was my point about questioning if you understand the site you are on It definitely is not an anti-capitalism site.
Best wishes
- Real Estate Agent · Sisters, OR · Member since 2014 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes2y
@Account Closed
If you go to the the back of a kitchen at most restaurants there are a bunch of hispanic guys many American citizens. You should ask them if open boarders and bringing in immigrants that will work for lower wages helps them and their families. I just say that because it is harder to accuse them of being racist.
- Real Estate Broker · Minneapolis, MN · Member since 2011 · 5k+ posts · 6k+ votes2y
Quote from @Account Closed:
Quote from @James Hamling:
Love it! This the kind of creative solution is what we need to be throwing against the blackboard.
Henry Mae and fences. Worthy of repeating for my 10,000th post👍Sorry boys. The "Provide the liquidity" has been spent. It's all those air craft carriers and sexy jets and money sent to Iran. Poof, all gone, spent, that's why we have inflation, high taxes and high interest rates. Shoulda/coulda/woulda spent more time studying economics. ;-) The money ain't there.
Global banking crisis: What just happened? https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/17/business/global-banking-crisi...
Uhm..... do I have to be the one to inform him that mortgages are not financed by the Federal Government? To explain how Fannie/Freddie/Ginnie work????
Ken, your reply here makes as much sense as if you just posted a picture of a Llama and shouted out "KUMQUAT!!!!!"
@James Hamling: Your Comment: "Ken, your reply here makes as much sense as if you just posted a picture of a Llama and shouted out "KUMQUAT!!!!!""
I like broccoli better. It would help if you understood economics, but I digress.First, the Government has no money and does nothing to earn money. It simply taxes the citizens and takes money. That is not their money, it is our money. Then it sells bonds for more money. There is interest paid on that borrowed money.
When that money is diverted and used to buy carriers, sexy airplanes and kumquats, the government has to pay interest on the money they borrowed. So, they've taken money from us that is supposed to meet the need of "governing" and then on top of that, they sell bonds to get even more money. They have to pay interest on those bonds or people wouldn't buy the bonds.
That interest amount right now is $1,000,000,000,000 Per YEAR- so if the government didn't borrower huge amounts of money to fund the carriers and sexy airplanes and lots of other things, many things that are not even government's responsibility, they wouldn't have the $1,000,000,000,000 interest payment per YEAR. It will be more than that next year.
So, if you take the current year's interest, that money could have been spent building 3,300,000 houses to the tune of $300,000 each. Same thing for next year and the year after. That creates jobs, lots of good paying jobs. Jobs where the workers can afford to buy the houses they are building.
And it's money taken from the available pool of borrowing. That causes inflation. When the Fed decides to "fight inflation" and raises rates, and then when the Government decides to insure mortgages and then makes that mortgage insurance harder to get, well, that limits growth in the housing sector causing home prices to skyrocket while people’s incomes remain stagnant. Thus, there is a housing crisis.
OMG Ken, your rapidly becoming "the" master of WORTHLESS content......
I put something out there, a REAL potential POSITIVE thing that is a possible SOLUTION. And you come running into our brain-storming session, head wrapped in tinfoil screaming "NODKALSDdncnco jmodoisa OKJNSnf jdsooisao jsdaopjids"...... or whatever else gobbldie-gook.
Please, GO MAKE A POST on your gov debt rant, NOT HERE. This O.P. was NOT for that.
Your rant's here have literally NOTHING to do with what I posted. N-O-T-H-I-N-G.
Kens Reply to proposing a "Henry Mae":
KUMQUAT ! KUMQUAT ! KUMQUAT ! KUMQUAT !!!!!!!
- Real Estate Broker · Minneapolis, MN · Member since 2011 · 5k+ posts · 6k+ votes2y
Quote from @Account Closed:
Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Account Closed:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Account Closed:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Account Closed:
Quote from @Henry Clark:
....Maximizing profit is exactly what the Realtors.... ...have done in a rampant fashion.... ...thats the root of the problem you speak of.
Help me to understand this, I narrowed it to just the 1, for simplicity sake.
So your saying the whole housing problem, it's agent's, agent's who represent sellers and buyer's who some way some how have created the issues at hand.
How? And vs what?
An agent, representing a seller, YES 100% the job is to work for the BEST outcome of the seller, full-stop. Getting top dollar buyers will pay with best term's buyers will give. That is the job, literally and legally.
The listing agent has 0 control what buyers will or won't do, 0. So how is it the agent's "fault"? What else are they to do? Tell a seller "nope, sorry, I won't let you sell for that much, it's not affordable enough, your going to take $50k less and LIKE IT"?
AND, on opposite side, an agent acting for buyer's IS the counter-weight. Doing everything possible to get BUYERS there best deal, lowest price, best terms. So how in the hell is a buyers agent at fault of unaffordability? There fighting to make things MORE affordable.
It's a bizarre argument that only makes sense if picture it falling out the mouth of a rampant COMMUNIST who has zero knowledge or experience of and with real estate agent's.
Is that the case here? Are you a communist just pist over any/all things "Capitalist scum"?
Because I, as an agent, and EVERY agent I know, would LOVE a WAY more "affordable" market. We make the most on VOLUME. A $50k difference doesn't mean much more $ for us, our motive is VOLUME. And a better, more affordable market, means way more volume and that directly translates into more $ for the agent.
So you couldn't be more wrong, agent's WANT a more affordable market. We want it zinging along for EVERYONE. Agent's motive is affordability not stagflation.
As soon as you used the word communist, you told me everything I need to know about you.
"An agent, representing a seller, YES 100% the job is to work for the BEST outcome of the seller, full-stop. Getting top dollar buyers will pay with best term's buyers will give."
Yep. Agreed, thats what you'll do alright. Brewing up bidding wars, highest and best, ect.
"AND, on opposite side, an agent acting for buyer's IS the counter-weight. Doing everything possible to get BUYERS there best deal, lowest price, best terms."You know better than that, and so do we. I just dropped my douchebag agent who was more focused on her 2.5% than my interests as a buyer, as of last week. The inspection came back looking like **** and she fought tooth and nail to pursuade me to stay in the deal and not pull out or ask for the credits.
So while you Realtors are motivated by commissions on both sides, with plenty of lenders you can refer your clients to to help them overpay, while you take advantage of their own greed/ignorance/desperation, and a government and central bank facilitating the whole thing for you over the last decade-
ya right, Reators had no hand in the surge of home prices vs wages across the country.
Oooorrrr did the agent fire you as a client? That feel's way more believable.
And now, fired by your agent, didn't get the deal you wanted, despite stomping you feet and pouting, I mean come right, yelled "gimmie" and and whole-9, shoulda gotten everything wanted on a silver platter right.
So now, everything is agent's fault.
Too hard to find a deal; agent's fault.
Don't have enough of down payment; agent's fault.
My bacon isn't crisp enough on the burger; agent's fault.
It burn's when I pee; agent's fault.
- Rental Property Investor · Torrance, CA · Member since 2016 · 724 posts · 1k+ votes2y
@Palmer Thomas The increased demand by illegal immigrants makes sense, but I think it’s not even close to the heart of the problem. It’s a small dent compared to the effect of prolonged artificially low interest rates, and the hollowing out of American middle class jobs.
Quote from @Logan M.:
I have felt drawn to investing in Mobile Home Parks partially because I feel like it allows me to have an impact by providing affordable housing.
What I want to know is if there is a real solution to the unaffordability of housing in America.
I see grant programs and government assistance but it seems like it just inflates to problem.
Is the answer that we just need more housing units? What am I missing?
Quote from @Logan M.:
I have felt drawn to investing in Mobile Home Parks partially because I feel like it allows me to have an impact by providing affordable housing.
What I want to know is if there is a real solution to the unaffordability of housing in America.
I see grant programs and government assistance but it seems like it just inflates to problem.
Is the answer that we just need more housing units? What am I missing?
- 2yTheresa HarrisPro MemberMember since 2019 · 15k+ posts · 11k+ votes
Quote from @Account Closed:
@Palmer Thomas The increased demand by illegal immigrants makes sense, but I think it’s not even close to the heart of the problem. It’s a small dent compared to the effect of prolonged artificially low interest rates, and the hollowing out of American middle class jobs.
It is interesting to see how things are in different countries. In Canada our prime minister has increased immigration to a level that is not sustainable. In the last ~5 years, we've added 3.5 million people (all through immigration) and gone from ~36.5 million to 40 million. That's too much growth in a short period of time and the result is a housing shortage.
- Real Estate Agent · Sisters, OR · Member since 2014 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes2y
Quote from @Theresa Harris:
Quote from @Account Closed:
@Palmer Thomas The increased demand by illegal immigrants makes sense, but I think it’s not even close to the heart of the problem. It’s a small dent compared to the effect of prolonged artificially low interest rates, and the hollowing out of American middle class jobs.
It is interesting to see how things are in different countries. In Canada our prime minister has increased immigration to a level that is not sustainable. In the last ~5 years, we've added 3.5 million people (all through immigration) and gone from ~36.5 million to 40 million. That's too much growth in a short period of time and the result is a housing shortage.
The working poor people in the West are collateral damage to bring about a more "agreeable" population. It could be a lot worse though, you could be one of the 85k children who crossed the US border and the government has lost track of, those kids are nothing but pons and know one is looking out for them.
- Real Estate Broker · Minneapolis, MN · Member since 2011 · 5k+ posts · 6k+ votes2y
Quote from @Eric Bilderback:
Quote from @Theresa Harris:
Quote from @Account Closed:
@Palmer Thomas The increased demand by illegal immigrants makes sense, but I think it’s not even close to the heart of the problem. It’s a small dent compared to the effect of prolonged artificially low interest rates, and the hollowing out of American middle class jobs.
It is interesting to see how things are in different countries. In Canada our prime minister has increased immigration to a level that is not sustainable. In the last ~5 years, we've added 3.5 million people (all through immigration) and gone from ~36.5 million to 40 million. That's too much growth in a short period of time and the result is a housing shortage.
The working poor people in the West are collateral damage to bring about a more "agreeable" population. It could be a lot worse though, you could be one of the 85k children who crossed the US border and the government has lost track of, those kids are nothing but pons and know one is looking out for them.
What do you mean by a more "agreeable" population?
- 2yKerry Noble JrPro MemberInvestor · Indianapolis, IN · Member since 2018 · 2k+ posts · 1k+ votes
My thoughts.......and im only speaking from my city. The issue that I see is a couple things. Theyre building more apartment buildings and not affordable HOUSES. Theyll never be able to own their apartment. Granted some people shouldnt be home owners and never will. Here in Central IN.....46218 is a war zone by most standards. when i first started in real estate, you could get a rent ready rental for 40K that met the 2% rule. those same houses have tripled in value and the average mcdonalds worker can no longer afford the housing in the war zone area.........which is crazy. Wages and available HOUSES is the key.....
- Real Estate Agent · Sisters, OR · Member since 2014 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes2y
A population that will be responsive to government programs (aka vote buying), and to create a society that is not cohesive. "The bigger the state the smaller the citizen."
- Investor · Fresno, CA · Member since 2016 · 222 posts · 237 votes2y
This is obviously an extremely complicated topic that involves the intersection of private, government, and public interests.
At the end of the day I don't believe that investors themselves are well equipped to solve this problem. The act of investing is an attempt to generate a return on capital over time. The reason that affordable housing is not made more prevalent is that, in our semi-free market, building and providing affordable housing is not the highest and best use of capital. Or said another way, investors see easier risk-adjusted means of generating returns. To take less return than you otherwise could may be commendable, but if the investor is using outside funding they have a fiduciary responsibility to those investors to maximize returns. This isn't a real estate thing, but an American business thing. You can see this in companies who are focused on quarterly earnings at the expense of longer term benefits to themselves and society. When a real estate investor, or any wealthy person, chooses to provide a less profitable (or not profitable) service, it is an act of charity. So here are a few potential drivers towards a solution:
1. Allow investors to set up charitable entities to provide affordable housing. The entire capital outlay is a tax deduction as is any other charity.
2. The government provides other/additional financial/tax incentives to make the returns attractive enough to compete in the market.
3. Lower the standard for housing to reduce cost for qualified groups (tiny homes, efficiency apartments, everything builders grade/refurbished, streamlined code/permit process). At the end of the day all someone really needs is a bed, electricity, heat/cool (depending on climate), water, toilet, and a locking door. Everything else is a luxury. Heck, up until 100 years ago having indoor plumbing was a luxury.
- Member since 2023 · 52 posts · 43 votes2y
Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Account Closed:
Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Account Closed:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Account Closed:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Account Closed:
Quote from @Henry Clark:
....Maximizing profit is exactly what the Realtors.... ...have done in a rampant fashion.... ...thats the root of the problem you speak of.
Help me to understand this, I narrowed it to just the 1, for simplicity sake.
So your saying the whole housing problem, it's agent's, agent's who represent sellers and buyer's who some way some how have created the issues at hand.
How? And vs what?
An agent, representing a seller, YES 100% the job is to work for the BEST outcome of the seller, full-stop. Getting top dollar buyers will pay with best term's buyers will give. That is the job, literally and legally.
The listing agent has 0 control what buyers will or won't do, 0. So how is it the agent's "fault"? What else are they to do? Tell a seller "nope, sorry, I won't let you sell for that much, it's not affordable enough, your going to take $50k less and LIKE IT"?
AND, on opposite side, an agent acting for buyer's IS the counter-weight. Doing everything possible to get BUYERS there best deal, lowest price, best terms. So how in the hell is a buyers agent at fault of unaffordability? There fighting to make things MORE affordable.
It's a bizarre argument that only makes sense if picture it falling out the mouth of a rampant COMMUNIST who has zero knowledge or experience of and with real estate agent's.
Is that the case here? Are you a communist just pist over any/all things "Capitalist scum"?
Because I, as an agent, and EVERY agent I know, would LOVE a WAY more "affordable" market. We make the most on VOLUME. A $50k difference doesn't mean much more $ for us, our motive is VOLUME. And a better, more affordable market, means way more volume and that directly translates into more $ for the agent.
So you couldn't be more wrong, agent's WANT a more affordable market. We want it zinging along for EVERYONE. Agent's motive is affordability not stagflation.
As soon as you used the word communist, you told me everything I need to know about you.
"An agent, representing a seller, YES 100% the job is to work for the BEST outcome of the seller, full-stop. Getting top dollar buyers will pay with best term's buyers will give."
Yep. Agreed, thats what you'll do alright. Brewing up bidding wars, highest and best, ect.
"AND, on opposite side, an agent acting for buyer's IS the counter-weight. Doing everything possible to get BUYERS there best deal, lowest price, best terms."You know better than that, and so do we. I just dropped my douchebag agent who was more focused on her 2.5% than my interests as a buyer, as of last week. The inspection came back looking like **** and she fought tooth and nail to pursuade me to stay in the deal and not pull out or ask for the credits.
So while you Realtors are motivated by commissions on both sides, with plenty of lenders you can refer your clients to to help them overpay, while you take advantage of their own greed/ignorance/desperation, and a government and central bank facilitating the whole thing for you over the last decade-
ya right, Reators had no hand in the surge of home prices vs wages across the country.
Oooorrrr did the agent fire you as a client? That feel's way more believable.
And now, fired by your agent, didn't get the deal you wanted, despite stomping you feet and pouting, I mean come right, yelled "gimmie" and and whole-9, shoulda gotten everything wanted on a silver platter right.
So now, everything is agent's fault.
Too hard to find a deal; agent's fault.
Don't have enough of down payment; agent's fault.
My bacon isn't crisp enough on the burger; agent's fault.
It burn's when I pee; agent's fault.
You just demonstrated both your ignorance and your stupidity. I'm sorry, but this is just classic Dunning-Kruger. Since you like food references, maybe this explaination will reach you- belligerent pig-headedness and low IQ go together like peanut butter and jelly.
When I finally pulled my money out of escrow on the deal last week and told the agent I'm no longer interested in working with her in the future because she does not represent my interests- drawing the conclusion you did doesn't speak well of your intellect, regardless if it was only an attempt to serve your narrative.
And like I said before, you pretty much telegraphed who you were when you made the cheap McCarthist "communist" comment.
Regardless, agents like her, and seemly you, are all factors in the equation of the housing crisis the OP has referred to. Google the word Factor and read it a few times. You seem to be struggling there as well, evidenced by your last strawman "So now, everything is agent's fault."
I'm happy to continue a back and forth on this with reasonable others- operative word being reasonable. - Real Estate Broker · Minneapolis, MN · Member since 2011 · 5k+ posts · 6k+ votes2y
Quote from @Account Closed:
Quote from @James Hamling:
....Maximizing profit is exactly what the Realtors.... ...have done in a rampant fashion.... ...thats the root of the problem.....
....Brewing up bidding wars, highest and best, ect.
....inspection came back looking like ****
....Realtors are motivated by commissions.... ....government and central bank facilitating the whole thing....
...I finally pulled my money out of escrow... ....told the agent I'm no longer interested in working with her....
....you made the cheap McCarthist "communist" comment.
....agents like her, and seemly you, are all factors in the equation of the housing crisis....
- 2yHenry ClarkPro MemberDeveloper · Member since 2020 · 4k+ posts · 4k+ votes
@Account Closed
still asking what is your REI background or portfolio? Size doesn't matter. But knowing your position adds to the discussion. For example if you're trying to buy your first house to live in and you got a bad agent and someone from Shanghai outbid you, then that's just part of the process.
If this was your 10th offer and none accepted. Or if this was going to be your fifth unit. And you’re bouncing all over OSS and not working with repetitive agents.We have worked with 4 agents only and they have all been great. Brought me 4 deals I was not looking at. Have sold 10 locations thru them. Have another 18 coming in line to sell.
I would note what team relationship you have with them. It’s either you had a one off deal or your approach.
Also have someone walk you thru a buyers commission split.I’ve paid our agents $25,000 on top, that we did Not have to pay them. We are way ahead on the profit side with them as part of our team.
Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.