Hacker News Reader

Comment by aeternum | Hacker News Reader

Not sure if it counts as privatized when the vast majority of Americans are homeowners.

The gov had a ton of programs to increase the home ownership rate over the last 50 years, they were somewhat successful. Now you have a situation where the networth of 65-70% of the population is tightly coupled to their home price.

And we wonder why it's so hard to get them to vote for new housing.

As Munger says, Show me the incentives and I'll show you the outcome.

View on HN

The majority of homes in America are occupied by their owners (this is what home-ownership rates measure). It is not true to to say the majority of American adults are homeowners - that ratio is a lot lower.

Looking at the flip statistic, 36% of households rent so the numbers do seem to add up.

For many households, some of the residents may not technically share ownership of the house (not on the deed) such as kids or extended family living together, but still have a vested interest in the value going up.

There's enough government involvement to insure the paper-printing game everyone is playing, and that's all that counts. They guarantee the low end with the FHA, and that props up everything else.

Right, a better solution would be to package demand-stimulating legislation like FHA with supply-stimulating legislation like reductions in zoning restrictions.

The results of stimulating demand (FHA and similar) without changing supply is econ 101.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com