Just sayin

You're viewing a single thread.

248 comments

No person should be allowed to own more residential property than they're realistically need for living.
- I'm just curious how we'll define "realistic", because someone who's into just software programming might be satisfied with a studio apartment. I can't live without my basement workshop however. I like to make stuff.
  
  That's valid. But, for example: You don't need a dozen of different houses.
  
  Either end of the scale is clear. Less clear in the middle 😞
  
  Would a handyman who is fixing up several at a time need that many?
  
  How many houses can a person fix at once? Do you need to own them while fixing them? Why?
  
  Does the handyman permanently live in all of them?
- This is it right here. Housing is a right, not a commodity. Landlords shouldn't exist.
- Do you allow couples to own two houses then? How do you prevent two people living together from not owning a second house to rent?
  Also, you'd be surprised just how little a person needs to live in lol.
  
  I don't think we need to make this literally true - we can put in a lot of wiggle room, because we just need to restrict doing this at scale
  Say, no more than 2 homes per household, 1 extra for each additional adult. You want a vacation house, or a place near work? Fine. You want to buy another house and take your time moving? Fine. You want both? Make some compromises.
  Or we could make the limit 5 per household - that would be excessive, but if they couldn't rent them out it would still decomodify housing, because it's people buying homes at scale that really is killing us
  From there, you'd crack down locally - if you want to live in the boonies, I don't care if you have 5 acres. If you live in a city with a housing shortage, maybe you only get a certain square footage per person, maybe certain areas are primary residence only, or however you want to slice it

248 comments