• Hexadecimalkink@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    You’re moving the goal posts here. Did you buy the land for the purpose of building property? Bad. Did you convert arable land into housing? Bad. Was it a rocky bad piece of land that you invested in to build something more out of it? Good. Housing policy isn’t binary but in most cases the current personal private multiownership model doesn’t help anyone. My perspective is no one should be allowed to own more than one house, and if so anything beyond the first house should be heavily taxed.

    • KarmaTrainCaboose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Buying land for the purpose of building property is bad? I think any policy that discourages development of additional housing is probably not going to be great for house prices. Or if you’re handing out houses in a lottery system, it won’t be great for housing supply at least.

      • Hexadecimalkink@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ll give you an example; my country has food insecurity, rich people take arable farmland and build suburbs on that land instead of infilling the city downtown which has single detached homes less than a kilometre from the centre of the city. Do you think that this is a good thing they’re buying this farmland for suburbs, or a bad thing?