Hacker News Reader

Comment by lol768 | Hacker News Reader

> So many people and businesses are able to live beyond their means because of access to credit. If we eliminate the ability to create credit, then consumption would drop to a sustainable level and pollution would also drop and we would see an end to wasteful businesses, products, processes, and ways of life.

What about housing? A mortgage is going to be the only way for a lot of people to ever afford their own home.

View on HN

Or education? Especially in the US, it's unreasonable to pay for most universities without loans.

Well, to question your premise - Why is universal home ownership desirable or necessary?

It's either (near) universal or communal. Anything in between gives elites so much power over the less advantaged that you see a stratification of society similar to, well, what we're seeing now. Here's a quarantine project for you: build a model that lets you push around the %age of renters vs land owners. Virtually any model that contains a significant number of renters will eventually have one land owner and many renters, unless you see significant economic disasters in the model.

At least in the current system, a home is the best hope that for many people if they wish to have an 'asset' that is concrete and tangible. The practicality of it (i.e. basic human need for shelter) also makes it one of the best 'assets' to pass to your children.

Remember: unless the house was seriously overvalued, as long as you held onto/maintained your house through the 2008 housing crash, it's still worth more than it was pre crash.

Because tenants rights are poor? The difference in safety felt between owning and renting is related to perception of tenants rights. I think they (the difference and the rights) vary accordingly worldwide.

What are the shortfalls of tenant rights in your area? and how would you answer the previous question in a world with "ideal" tenant rights?

> How could tenant rights be improved, and how would you answer that question in a world with "ideal" tenant rights?

It's difficult isn't it? You need to somehow reconcile the fact that it's not the tenant's home with their desire to treat it like it is.

I've had to fight to get basic repairs and redecoration work done. In some of these cases I've still had a battle despite funding them myself!

I think something you could probably address is the lack of security with tenancies. In the UK, after the initial fixed period of an AST, it's very easy for either party to terminate the lease. I'd prefer for this to be tipped in favour of the tenant, so that they can be flexible and leave if necessary - but they're not also in danger of homelessness at very short notice.

Because I want to be able to install shelves in the garage or put a new oven in the kitchen without having to negotiate with a landlord.

How many people does your situation apply to? Personally, I prefer having a landlord take care of appliances over the freedom to make my own changes.

Probably a lot. I've never seen an apartment that lets you make any changes beyond putting in your own furniture. No painting walls, no hanging pictures, changing carpets, etc. You're stuck with whatever bargain bin ammenities the landlord picked, unless you feel like packing up and moving. Plus, your rent will probably go up at a similar rate to inflation, whereas a mortgage payment will stay the same as long as you didn't sign up for an adjustable rate mortgage.

Every long-term homeowner I know has done at least that much. Many have done larger home improvement and remodeling projects.

Yes, I'd assume home owners modify their house... but that doesn't really answer the question.

The US home ownership rate is 64%. So to answer your original question, that situation applies to nearly 64% of people.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com