Homeownership is a luxury, not a right. Its still within reach in many locales. If the locals value education as a product they will bid it up.
I dont see how this isnt just the market telling educators they should go elsewhere?
I dont see how this isnt just the market telling educators they should go elsewhere?
Why do we spend $100+ billion per year of tax payer dollars subsidizing luxury purchases? (via the federal mortgage interest deduction)
Similarly, the only reason to sell an asset is when you think you can make more money on the equity elsewhere. If its true that the landlord can take their equity elsewhere for a better return, maybe the renter (soon to be owner) should be investing elsewhere?
Also, afaik young people are increasingly mobile, meaning they're going to be giving a large portion of their equity (either downpayment or profits) to real estate agents' commissions, banks closing costs, legal fees, etc etc.
if housing is not affordable, its probably because of artificially (or temporarily) restricted supply.
http://www.curbed.com/2016/6/21/11956516/millennial-first-ti...
We've spent over $100+ billion on corn subsidies since 1995, too.
Distortions.
That said, Stanford has a similar housing support program for its professors because when you're moving from Iowa to Palo Alto, it doesn't matter how much your pay has increased. You're going to need equity support to buy a home.