Housing - Why are smaller houses not being built?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted by tony1679
... I don't appreciate people like you. It's people like you waltzing around flaunting how they've been buying up all the houses with any semblance of attainability so that they can either flip them (aka adding a bunch of cheap useless crap to make them seem more appealing) for double the amount it was, or so they can rent (usually pronounced 'scam') people out of more money they don't really have so they can "retire early, buy a condo on the ocean in Orange Beach, and enjoy a steady income stream." Either way, by buying one more house for either purpose, it takes away someone else's dream of owning a home and actually being able to afford it. More and more houses are being bought by fewer and fewer owners. Yet we wonder why housing is so expensive. They aren't commodities, they're literal necessities. Commodities like (most) motor oil are sold at many retailers. This keeps the price down. But when it's a need, like electricity (usually monopolized in most areas) it's usually regulated to prevent price gouging. So why is housing different? We regulate where, how, and why, in fine detail, how houses are built. Why are they not regulated to prevent people like Fawteen from buying homes for a living?

I get it, it's called capitalism. I agree, capitalism is the best system. But there should be a point where the flip/rent game gets regulated. ....


The guy who cuts my hair has about as many rent houses as this guy.

Owning real estate is how the average guy gets wealthy. Not the stock market, real estate.

Regulating that out of existence isn't doing the little guy any favors - it will just make things better for the super wealthy.

And new houses are commodities. As I pointed out earlier, in newly constructed subdivisions, the only reason the house exists is to sell the lots.

Education in this country is a disgrace.
 
Originally Posted by Win
Owning real estate is how the average guy gets wealthy. Not the stock market, real estate.

Not sure if the bogleheads forum would agree with you on that one.
 
Originally Posted by supton
Originally Posted by Win
Owning real estate is how the average guy gets wealthy. Not the stock market, real estate.

Not sure if the bogleheads forum would agree with you on that one.

I could get to the end of the line in a corvette, on a push bike, on a rocket, excavator, turtle, etc etc
I just need to get there.

Stocks may not be for me and real estate may not be for you.

RE: barber: it's a connections/ People Relations job. You get to talk with everybody and everybody knows you. So he will find out first about a house to sell, have a handyman/pro ready when needed, Mr Win when lawyer needed, and many others.
It's not a case of being there at the right moment, but making yourself be there at the right moment.
 
Originally Posted by Win
Regulating that out of existence isn't doing the little guy any favors - it will just make things better for the super wealthy.
If one is prevented from owning more than 3 or 5 houses, how exactly will this aid the wealthy?!? How wouldn't this help the little guy? Demand for houses would drop because slumlords wouldn't be looking for their 57th rent house, and prices would fall. Am I wrong? Please elaborate.
Originally Posted by Win
Education in this country is a disgrace.
While I do completely agree, I sure hope that wasn't directed toward me, as I've explained my viewpoints...
 
Originally Posted by tony1679
Originally Posted by Win
Regulating that out of existence isn't doing the little guy any favors - it will just make things better for the super wealthy.
If one is prevented from owning more than 3 or 5 houses, how exactly will this aid the wealthy?!? How wouldn't this help the little guy? Demand for houses would drop because slumlords wouldn't be looking for their 57th rent house, and prices would fall. Am I wrong? Please elaborate.
Originally Posted by Win
Education in this country is a disgrace.
While I do completely agree, I sure hope that wasn't directed toward me, as I've explained my viewpoints...


I don't think it's well thought out. There's always work around. I know in my real estate business people have gotten around the 4 mortgage limit by using other friends/family to purchase additional property, they just become silent partners. Actually I suppose that's actually one of the limits out there, can't do more than 4 conventional mortgages. But of course there's access to commercial mortgages and other types, but the rates and terms don't tend to be as good.
 
Originally Posted by tony1679
Originally Posted by Win
Regulating that out of existence isn't doing the little guy any favors - it will just make things better for the super wealthy.
If one is prevented from owning more than 3 or 5 houses, how exactly will this aid the wealthy?!? How wouldn't this help the little guy? Demand for houses would drop because slumlords wouldn't be looking for their 57th rent house, and prices would fall. Am I wrong? Please elaborate.


Well...considering the many people who DO own more than 3 or 5 properties, the result would likely be an instant crash of house values as the market is flooded, many tenants forced out...along with a rash of "suspicious" fires.
 
Originally Posted by Jarlaxle
Originally Posted by tony1679
Originally Posted by Win
Regulating that out of existence isn't doing the little guy any favors - it will just make things better for the super wealthy.
If one is prevented from owning more than 3 or 5 houses, how exactly will this aid the wealthy?!? How wouldn't this help the little guy? Demand for houses would drop because slumlords wouldn't be looking for their 57th rent house, and prices would fall. Am I wrong? Please elaborate.


Well...considering the many people who DO own more than 3 or 5 properties, the result would likely be an instant crash of house values as the market is flooded, many tenants forced out...along with a rash of "suspicious" fires.
Which validates my point that there are way too many multi-property owners, and the housing market would become cheaper...
 
Originally Posted by tony1679
Originally Posted by Jarlaxle
Originally Posted by tony1679
Originally Posted by Win
Regulating that out of existence isn't doing the little guy any favors - it will just make things better for the super wealthy.
If one is prevented from owning more than 3 or 5 houses, how exactly will this aid the wealthy?!? How wouldn't this help the little guy? Demand for houses would drop because slumlords wouldn't be looking for their 57th rent house, and prices would fall. Am I wrong? Please elaborate.


Well...considering the many people who DO own more than 3 or 5 properties, the result would likely be an instant crash of house values as the market is flooded, many tenants forced out...along with a rash of "suspicious" fires.
Which validates my point that there are way too many multi-property owners, and the housing market would become cheaper...

WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.....................................
 
Originally Posted by tony1679
Originally Posted by Jarlaxle
Originally Posted by tony1679
Originally Posted by Win
Regulating that out of existence isn't doing the little guy any favors - it will just make things better for the super wealthy.
If one is prevented from owning more than 3 or 5 houses, how exactly will this aid the wealthy?!? How wouldn't this help the little guy? Demand for houses would drop because slumlords wouldn't be looking for their 57th rent house, and prices would fall. Am I wrong? Please elaborate.


Well...considering the many people who DO own more than 3 or 5 properties, the result would likely be an instant crash of house values as the market is flooded, many tenants forced out...along with a rash of "suspicious" fires.
Which validates my point that there are way too many multi-property owners, and the housing market would become cheaper...


Yeah, but it's a big dream. Not sure how it would even pass muster legally. Countries that restrict ownership of property are typically communist or socialist....
 
Originally Posted by tony1679
Originally Posted by Fawteen
Originally Posted by fdcg27

The real estate sales guys like to tout houses as investments, but they really aren't.


You don't know what you're talking about. I've been in real estate for almost 40 years and I currently own 38 rental units, 34 of which are single family homes. Every one of them is an investment, and every one of them provides me with a significant monthly income. I've bought and sold another 20 or so properties. All but 3 netted us a significant profit.

Even our own home has more than tripled in value in the last 25 years.

Originally Posted by aquariuscsm
I totally agree with you Tony. The only way you'll find what you're looking for is to find a "real" house that was built in the 1950s. Real brick, real hardwood,etc. That's why we've rented as long as we have, we can't find that perfect mid-century house we dream of owning. As soon as the perfect one comes up for sale,it's bought immediately. We refuse to buy a cookie cutter piece of junk.


I appreciate people like you. It's people like you that have given my wife and I the ability to retire early, buy a condo on the ocean in Orange Beach, and enjoy a steady income stream. People like you also allowed us to pay for our current home in cash.
Thank you!
I don't appreciate people like you. It's people like you waltzing around flaunting how they've been buying up all the houses with any semblance of attainability so that they can either flip them (aka adding a bunch of cheap useless crap to make them seem more appealing) for double the amount it was, or so they can rent (usually pronounced 'scam') people out of more money they don't really have so they can "retire early, buy a condo on the ocean in Orange Beach, and enjoy a steady income stream." Either way, by buying one more house for either purpose, it takes away someone else's dream of owning a home and actually being able to afford it. More and more houses are being bought by fewer and fewer owners. Yet we wonder why housing is so expensive. They aren't commodities, they're literal necessities. Commodities like (most) motor oil are sold at many retailers. This keeps the price down. But when it's a need, like electricity (usually monopolized in most areas) it's usually regulated to prevent price gouging. So why is housing different? We regulate where, how, and why, in fine detail, how houses are built. Why are they not regulated to prevent people like Fawteen from buying homes for a living?

I get it, it's called capitalism. I agree, capitalism is the best system. But there should be a point where the flip/rent game gets regulated. But it won't. It'll just keep driving prices higher and higher to the point where nobody will care anymore (look at our homeless population) and go without. That's when recession hits and the market bursts. I bet these are the same landlords that cry foul when their "investment" values plummet. That's when they either sell off properties or sell their own property because they can no longer afford it. All because the page with the word modesty is always ripped out of their dictionary. I have zero sympathy either way. Shouldn't have owned that many in the first place... Oops, I'm rambling/ranting.

Bottom line, it's flaunting wealth in people's face, and quite frankly, it's disgusting and I have zero respect for your type. I'm not "offended" and I certainly am not calling to get the mod police in here. I'm no fan of censorship. Just stating my point of view (and most likely all of your tenants' point of view as well).


So why don't you do it the way you think it should be done?

If your idea is viable, you'll be a great success.

Let us know how it goes...
 
Originally Posted by tony1679
Originally Posted by Fawteen
Originally Posted by fdcg27

The real estate sales guys like to tout houses as investments, but they really aren't.


You don't know what you're talking about. I've been in real estate for almost 40 years and I currently own 38 rental units, 34 of which are single family homes. Every one of them is an investment, and every one of them provides me with a significant monthly income. I've bought and sold another 20 or so properties. All but 3 netted us a significant profit.

Even our own home has more than tripled in value in the last 25 years.

Originally Posted by aquariuscsm
I totally agree with you Tony. The only way you'll find what you're looking for is to find a "real" house that was built in the 1950s. Real brick, real hardwood,etc. That's why we've rented as long as we have, we can't find that perfect mid-century house we dream of owning. As soon as the perfect one comes up for sale,it's bought immediately. We refuse to buy a cookie cutter piece of junk.


I appreciate people like you. It's people like you that have given my wife and I the ability to retire early, buy a condo on the ocean in Orange Beach, and enjoy a steady income stream. People like you also allowed us to pay for our current home in cash.
Thank you!
I don't appreciate people like you. It's people like you waltzing around flaunting how they've been buying up all the houses with any semblance of attainability so that they can either flip them (aka adding a bunch of cheap useless crap to make them seem more appealing) for double the amount it was, or so they can rent (usually pronounced 'scam') people out of more money they don't really have so they can "retire early, buy a condo on the ocean in Orange Beach, and enjoy a steady income stream." Either way, by buying one more house for either purpose, it takes away someone else's dream of owning a home and actually being able to afford it. More and more houses are being bought by fewer and fewer owners. Yet we wonder why housing is so expensive. They aren't commodities, they're literal necessities. Commodities like (most) motor oil are sold at many retailers. This keeps the price down. But when it's a need, like electricity (usually monopolized in most areas) it's usually regulated to prevent price gouging. So why is housing different? We regulate where, how, and why, in fine detail, how houses are built. Why are they not regulated to prevent people like Fawteen from buying homes for a living?

I get it, it's called capitalism. I agree, capitalism is the best system. But there should be a point where the flip/rent game gets regulated. But it won't. It'll just keep driving prices higher and higher to the point where nobody will care anymore (look at our homeless population) and go without. That's when recession hits and the market bursts. I bet these are the same landlords that cry foul when their "investment" values plummet. That's when they either sell off properties or sell their own property because they can no longer afford it. All because the page with the word modesty is always ripped out of their dictionary. I have zero sympathy either way. Shouldn't have owned that many in the first place... Oops, I'm rambling/ranting.

Bottom line, it's flaunting wealth in people's face, and quite frankly, it's disgusting and I have zero respect for your type. I'm not "offended" and I certainly am not calling to get the mod police in here. I'm no fan of censorship. Just stating my point of view (and most likely all of your tenants' point of view as well).


Well, should he flaunt poverty instead? Also, c'mon, he didn't swoop in and do some dirty shady deal or threaten anyone. If they had the ability to buy it they would. Well, they didn't, so now he has it, and it's a rental. If his tenants could do "better", they would. His success isn't harming them in the least. Choices. Hard work. Time invested. Blah blah blah. People get what they put into life, depending on their mental and physical horsepower, so to speak.

That's like all these people who whine about not being rich. Maybe they're not rich because they're not good enough to be rich. Maybe they aren't smart enough/have enough self-control, etc. They'd just [censored] it up because they're incapable, and we know this, because they don't have it to begin with.


So what happens when a poor gets money? I mean, they're just poor because dirty rich people keep them down, right? So what happens if that is eliminated and they get that cheese?

Now, not everyone who plays the lottery is poor, but I'd wager most who WIN, are then MUCH better off...
https://wolfstreet.com/2018/04/17/nearly-one-third-of-u-s-lottery-winners-declare-bankruptcy/

So why do 33% of them end up going bankrupt?

Because they aren't capable of having money at that level. They just aren't. People rise to the level of their capabilities in America, and that's the beauty of it. Me? I could probably do more. In fact, I know I could have nicer things. I just lack the discipline and willpower to make that happen. So guess where I am? I'm stuck in the very low 6-figure income range. That's probably the best I'll ever manage, and I'm planning in later years to cut down and work less demanding things and schedules which will drop my income further, as I pay things off I can afford pay cuts without sacrificing quality of life in that aspect. I'm not mad. I'm not upset over the BITOG'er who has a house bigger than mine, land more than I, or a vehicle sexier than mine. You know why? Because I don't deserve it, because I have not put in the effort to attain it, and they have, and if they had it handed to them, they had the brains and self control not to [censored] it up, which in itself might (I don't know) be more t han I have, too.

Lesson here? Stop whining, rise to a level you're comfortable with, and stop blaming others for your failure to have done so previously. If you're already at the level you can attain in life, do some soul searching and learn to love the life you have.
 
Originally Posted by Jarlaxle
WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.....................................

What exactly am I missing here? Please enlighten me. You assume I'm stupid, yet I'm not, considering I at least understand your sarcastic comment implies I missed a point. So let's hear it.
 
Originally Posted by 02SE
So why don't you do it the way you think it should be done?

If your idea is viable, you'll be a great success.

Let us know how it goes...
I am simply expressing an opinion, not saying I should rule the world. The best comparison I can offer is I feel the housing market/ownership should be regulated in a more strict manner than what it is currently, just like I feel career polit- er, um 'regulators' should have more strict term limits. Nobody should be turning either into a career. But I don't want to get this thread locked, so I'll simply stop here.

If this post somehow went too far because I merely mentioned part of a 'forbidden' word
smirk2.gif
and stated a very popular opinion regarding that word, please delete it instead of locking the thread. 8 pages indicates it's clearly a topic that should be discussed further.
 
Originally Posted by Ws6
...That's like all these people who whine about not being rich. Maybe they're not rich because they're not good enough to be rich. Maybe they aren't smart enough/have enough self-control, etc. They'd just [censored] it up because they're incapable, and we know this, because they don't have it to begin with...
I cannot express enough how ignorant this is (not calling you ignorant, just the statement). So people can't be born into unfortunate circumstances? Intelligent, wise-decision-making, hard working people can't be dealt terrible cards? Can't have unexpected medical issues/astronomical expenses? C'mon. I agree in a lot of cases, but it's FAR from a blanket statement.
Originally Posted by Ws6
Lesson here? Stop whining, rise to a level you're comfortable with, and stop blaming others for your failure to have done so previously. If you're already at the level you can attain in life, do some soul searching and learn to love the life you have.
I'm not whining that I'm below a so-called level. I'm disgruntled at the fact that the sub-"standard" level I would consider my dream home isn't allowed due to regulations requiring that I build something that won't upset my neighbors (by building something that somehow would lower their property value). It's a slap in the face considering I'd build it to every code and visual expectation under the sun (I wouldn't build a run down shack), yet sub-standard mobile homes are allowed to be placed in many, many locations that do this very thing. I've done plenty of soul searching. I know what level I can attain in life, and it's well within reach. I'm just prohibited from my ideal housing scenario in many locations.

In my case, it's either sacrifice the location I want and move significantly farther away (wasted gas, increased auto expenses, farther from family, etc. a.k.a.: higher cost), or sacrifice my dream home and buy a more expensive, lesser quality (older, problems), MUCH more expensive home, that I'm far from in love with (more acceptable to others, higher taxes, Jones approved... a.k.a.: higher cost). I'm paying more than I want and sacrificing either way. I'm okay with some minor compromise, but these are the two largest components of a home... cost and location. Why can I only choose one?
 
Originally Posted by tony1679
I'm paying more than I want and sacrificing either way. I'm okay with some minor compromise, but these are the two largest components of a home... cost and location. Why can I only choose one?


It's a pretty standard problem in real estate. I normally say it's about cost, location and condition. Pick two.

Point is that nothing is ever ideal.
 
Originally Posted by tony1679
Originally Posted by 02SE
So why don't you do it the way you think it should be done?

If your idea is viable, you'll be a great success.

Let us know how it goes...
I am simply expressing an opinion, not saying I should rule the world. The best comparison I can offer is I feel the housing market/ownership should be regulated in a more strict manner than what it is currently, just like I feel career polit- er, um 'regulators' should have more strict term limits. Nobody should be turning either into a career. But I don't want to get this thread locked, so I'll simply stop here.

If this post somehow went too far because I merely mentioned part of a 'forbidden' word
smirk2.gif
and stated a very popular opinion regarding that word, please delete it instead of locking the thread. 8 pages indicates it's clearly a topic that should be discussed further.



Transportation is a necessity. Since you're a mechanic, I just want to say Congratulations Comrade for working for free, so all those people can have their basic transportation needs met.

I have seen the light, and am now ashamed to admit that when I worked in consumer automotive repair, I actually had the audacity to insist on being paid for my services. Just like those evil people that take the risk of buying real estate with the hope of turning a profit after making improvements to make the property attractive, and possibly, selling it.

I also strived to make a profit when I started my own business. And when I sold that business after making it a success.

Karl Marx would not be happy with me...
 
Originally Posted by 02SE
Originally Posted by tony1679
Originally Posted by 02SE
So why don't you do it the way you think it should be done?

If your idea is viable, you'll be a great success.

Let us know how it goes...
I am simply expressing an opinion, not saying I should rule the world. The best comparison I can offer is I feel the housing market/ownership should be regulated in a more strict manner than what it is currently, just like I feel career polit- er, um 'regulators' should have more strict term limits. Nobody should be turning either into a career. But I don't want to get this thread locked, so I'll simply stop here.

If this post somehow went too far because I merely mentioned part of a 'forbidden' word
smirk2.gif
and stated a very popular opinion regarding that word, please delete it instead of locking the thread. 8 pages indicates it's clearly a topic that should be discussed further.



Transportation is a necessity. Since you're a mechanic, I just want to say Congratulations Comrade for working for free, so all those people can have their basic transportation needs met.

I have seen the light, and am now ashamed to admit that when I worked in consumer automotive repair, I actually had the audacity to insist on being paid for my services. Just like those evil people that take the risk of buying real estate with the hope of turning a profit after making improvements to make the property attractive, and possibly, selling it.

I also strived to make a profit when I started my own business. And when I sold that business after making it a success.

Karl Marx would not be happy with me...

Did you work for one of those dealers who had the audacity to have more than 5 repair bays?
 
Originally Posted by 02SE
Karl Marx would not be happy with me...


Karl Marx was a loud-mouthed alcoholic who sponged off his rich friends. Be glad he's not happy with you. He didn't practice what he preached.
 
Originally Posted by supton
Originally Posted by 02SE
Originally Posted by tony1679
Originally Posted by 02SE
So why don't you do it the way you think it should be done?

If your idea is viable, you'll be a great success.

Let us know how it goes...
I am simply expressing an opinion, not saying I should rule the world. The best comparison I can offer is I feel the housing market/ownership should be regulated in a more strict manner than what it is currently, just like I feel career polit- er, um 'regulators' should have more strict term limits. Nobody should be turning either into a career. But I don't want to get this thread locked, so I'll simply stop here.

If this post somehow went too far because I merely mentioned part of a 'forbidden' word
smirk2.gif
and stated a very popular opinion regarding that word, please delete it instead of locking the thread. 8 pages indicates it's clearly a topic that should be discussed further.



Transportation is a necessity. Since you're a mechanic, I just want to say Congratulations Comrade for working for free, so all those people can have their basic transportation needs met.

I have seen the light, and am now ashamed to admit that when I worked in consumer automotive repair, I actually had the audacity to insist on being paid for my services. Just like those evil people that take the risk of buying real estate with the hope of turning a profit after making improvements to make the property attractive, and possibly, selling it.

I also strived to make a profit when I started my own business. And when I sold that business after making it a success.

Karl Marx would not be happy with me...

Did you work for one of those dealers who had the audacity to have more than 5 repair bays?


I did. As a master tech at a Toyota dealer with IIRC 10 or so bays. And then at independent shops that had multiple bays too.

I am so ashamed...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top