Hacker News Reader

Comment by bArray | Hacker News Reader

"31% Can't Pay the Rent" != "31% Are Not Paying Rent"

"Can't" indicates they are unable, whereas I suspect at least some are taking advantage of the current situation [1]. Any situation where it's possible to take advantage, you can almost guarantee that people will.

This is not the way forwards - not paying rent will have a large knock-on effect for landlords (which, despite some sentiment, isn't necessarily the 1%). The US government needs to provide money if they are going to demand that people stay at home and not work.

Ultimately they either bring the economy to a screaming halt (entirely) or trickle money to those unable to work in order to keep things going. In my opinion stalling the economy is a bad idea - it can cost a lot of time and money to get it going again.

[1] https://news.yahoo.com/rent-strike-idea-gaining-steam-170345...

View on HN

Start by banning China (and any other country that doesn't allow US citizens to own land) from owning property in the US. Something tells me when you get rid of all the foreign profit lords, that property will be much more affordable in many areas.

It’s not that simple, unfortunately. US businesses and governments have heavily relied on Chinese capital for various economic initiatives, from transit to manufacturing.[0]

Barring one of our largest financial partners (and largest creditors) would certainly have a devastating effect on our economy.

0: https://www.americanmanufacturing.org/blog/entry/congress-ex....

My guess is the Chinese are eventually going to want something real when they ship us tons of real goods and we ship them paper.

How do you make that happen, realistically?

"You must sell."

"Okay, this 3br house is $10MM. It's not selling."

Eminent domain?

Are we going to do that for the huge swathes of vacant homes we already have, too?

The government already values homes for the purpose of property taxes.

So you're mandating that a house must not just be sold, but that it must be sold at or below property-appraised tax value?

That is sure to go down well.

The number of housing buys in the US and Canada that are by Chinese nationals is low single digits. Chinese people, AirBnB, and boomers seem to be the boogeymen of choice for people who want to blame high housing prices on anything other than the fact that new housing supply has been retarded while demand continues to increase at a low but steady rate.

If demand grows while supply stays constant, any 7th grader could tell you the consequences, but this basic fact seems to elude our elected officials.

You conveniently fail to mention that those properties are in already high demand areas with huge shortages in affordable housing. It makes a difference, like it or not. Pretending that because its not the entire issue, it isn't part of it at all, is ignorant at best.

A study of the Spanish Flu pandemic indicates that an early severe lockdown actually minimises the long term economic impact.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/04/pandemic-economy-less...

No city I'm aware of enacted a severe lockdown by our standards during the Spanish Flu. I haven't seen any record of a ban on private gatherings, or a general shutdown of non-essential businesses (as opposed to a targeted ban of bars and restaurants).

And more people did die as a consequence. I’m not being smart, maybe that was the better option compared to what we’re doing now, all things considered. We may be at or close to exemplifying the idiom of “cutting our nose to spite our face”.

Keep reading.

Here’s my city. https://www.influenzaarchive.org/cities/city-albany.html#

NYC didn’t shut down, but had an active surveillance program to monitor the situation and act. That’s one of the real tragedies of the complete failure of the federal government. Their ineptitude will kill thousands and impoverish millions.

This looks consistent with what I said. The city shut schools, libraries, everywhere that involved indoor public gatherings, but I'm not seeing anything here about bans on private gatherings or general orders to not leave your house.

Spanish Flu and Covid-19 seem comparably lethal. The flu killed 600,000 Americans out of a much lower population and incapacitated many millions more due to illness, plus those caring for them. All of that even with a basic lockdown would cause economic mayhem anyway. There is no magical choice which leads to an un impacted economy. Those cities that did the least suffered the worst anyway, because there is no option to ‘choose the economy’. That’s the real lesson of the Spanish Flu.

Your first two paragraphs are an interesting point. If I were laid off (or just hours reduced to zero for the duration), I wouldn't be paying bills that I didn't have to pay. I'll save my money for groceries; the rent can wait. Either I get a check from Uncle Sam, or the renter cuts me some slack, or I go live in my car, but I still have to eat.

The economy will be fine... the black plague had great economic outcomes as it always does when a whole bunch of people die. We should reopen the entire country tomorrow... no travel restrictions, open every border and see what happens.

Maximising economic opportunities for lucky survivors is not the goal here.

Half of the European population died during the Black Plague, it’s simply not acceptable to use that case as a reference for economic growth.

Governments have a responsibility to all their citizens, not just stockholders.

Does the economy exist to serve the needs of the people, or do the people exist to serve the needs of the economy?

The 'economy' isn't some wild and mystic beast that we must tame into subservience. It's the way we measure the flow of money, goods, and services. By definition it cannot 'serve' anyone.

Neither is it some mystic natural law?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com