• GoofSchmoofer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    92
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    13 hours ago

    What’s crazy to me is this is a well known problem yet the people that have the ability to legislate this have just 100% ignored it.

    The presidential candidates in the US either completely ignore it (trump) or give a solution of building 3 million new homes (Harris). No one wants to actually start regulating the number of homes that an individual or company can own. It’s an obvious solution to the problem yet, complete silence from the law makers.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      8 hours ago

      This is something that can be done at the municipal level. Forget about Trump; this won’t happen at the federal level. Write your local mayor and town alder.

    • cogman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      48
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      In my state (Idaho) it’s because a good number of the legislators are landlords.

      They don’t give a fuck that half their apartments are Airbnbs, they prefer it that way.

    • phoenixz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Quite a few cities have worked hard on outlawing Airbnb. At least in Europe and (AFAIK) Canada.

      The US? I have no idea

    • Aceticon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      Because when a significant proportion of the housing market gets turned into business spaces (which is what AirBnBs are), it reduces supply in the housing market, pushing house prices up.

      This benefits politicians in several ways:

      • Most national politicians are at the wealth level were they have enough savings, excess income or simply receive “housing subsidies” as part of their work (for example, parliamentarieans when they’re from a city other than where the parliament is located) that they are also “realestate investors” alongside their day-job as politiciasn, in which case higher house prices directly make their properties worth more hence make them richer.
      • Realestate inflation is generally not counted in the Official Inflation indexes in most of the West. It is however counted in the Real GDP numbers (via a mechanism called Inputted Rent). Give the way Official GDP (which is the Nominal one, i.e. after inflation has been removed) is calculated, housing inflation by feeding into Real GDP but not into the inflation index used to calculate Nominal GDP from it, directly pushes up the Official GDP numbers, so for government politicias housing inflation is a wonderful way to create fake GDP Growth (fake because house prices going up by mere price inflation isn’t really actual wealth - i.e. the “Product” in GDP - being created) which they then parade all over the Press as being the result of their great work in government.
      • It makes their very wealthy and very thankful friends even more wealthy and they’ll be very thankful to those politicians. Lot’s of thankfulness available from the Owner class for people who pass measures to make their Assets worth even more, from being welcome to the most luxurious events all the way to millionaire payouts in the Speech Giving Circuit, Non-Executive Board memberships and gold-plated “Consultancy” gigs.
    • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 hours ago

      That’s not as surprising as you may think. Take campaign financial reform. Campaign finance reform is one of the only issues that 100% of Congress agrees that it needs to be fixed. Every single one of them HATES the fact that they have to spend upwards of 75% of their time in Congress on the phone calling rich donors. There have been multiple common sense bills that have been introduced that call for capped and federally supplied campaign funds. Almost none of them will vote for it, because that removes the primary tool of power that big moneyed interests have to put pressure on politicians, so their big money donors tell them not to vote in their own self interests, and dangle a check in front of them to do so.