• amenji@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    You’re saying there’s plenty of homes as if they are natural resources to be distributed. They aren’t. Someone who spends money to build the homes and covers the costs necessary to even start building the homes need to get their return.

    Even if they are natural resources to be distributed and enough houses already exists, what are you proposing? Just give the homes away?

    You’re paying a house and now its worth is more than double the amount you paid 17 years. Sorry, you’re an idiot if you think there’s a “correct” price of anything. That’s the point of prices in market economy. They rise and fall depends on countless economic circumstances. I don’t think your old house lives in a vacuum not affected by the economic changes surrounding your town/city or neighborhood.

    If you’re thinking about housing price cap, let’s even stop this discussion because clearly you are not familiar about macroeconomic causes and effects.

      • amenji@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        This isn’t really about winning or losing (defined by what, exactly? Upvotes? Lol)

        It’s good argument on differing ideas.

        And I only mentioned price caps because you mentioned capping houses owned. Not my intention to strawman you.