- cross-posted to:
- neoliberal@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- neoliberal@lemmy.world
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/41774241
You must log in or # to comment.
No, it’s the consequences of capitalism.
There are over 15 million empty houses in America, over 5 million of those are in the 50 largest metropolitan areas of the US.
770,000 people were counted as houseless in 2024.
Sure not every house is in great condition, and not every house is in a major city - but there is surely enough that people could use to if not house everyone, at the very least make a huge dent in that figure. The issue is people cannot afford to buy them because housing is seen as an industry not a basic life need.
You know I see this figure a lot, but I wonder how many of these are actually liveable.
My grandfather’s old home is unoccupied, that’s because the roof entirely collapsed. The county refuses to remove it from the property taxes. Based on all available records it’s an unoccupied home, but it’s a total loss in reality.
Who knows, but you only need 5.13% to be in good condition to house everyone.
Plus getting them all up to code is huge job creation, so it’s win-win.
Also many people would volunteer to help restore these places for people’s use if it was actually a legal option.
Residential housing shouldn’t be owned by corporations. It should be built by them and then sold to individuals.
A co-op could handle it without much problem.
There is enough housing. It sits unoccupied and sometimes disrepair.
Yes, though also some are in such economically depressed areas that you can barely get a job.
We also need to organize for clean public transit; in the meantime, there’s often plenty in bustling areas, as well.
Lots of empty apartments are in luxury buildings right in the best parts of big cities.
Fully furnished too, just empty tax shelters to be traded back and forth by billionaires and their kids when they need cash.
We need to convince the desk staff and security in this buildings to help people squat in them indefinitely.
But a lot of them are in densely populated suburbs or cities, driven out by the artificially inflated rental costs. The owners would rather have a few units empty than lower the rent.
- Crack down on price fixing
- Don’t let corporations run AirBNBs or similar
- Don’t let corporations own any rental building under approximately 10 units.
- Don’t let rental buildings have more than a low percentage of empty units for turn around. They have to lower the rent then. If it goes to $200/month, then so be it.
There are so many things to try, but Trickle Down Housing never works.
Don’t let corporations own single family homes. Drastically increase the tax rate for more than 3 houses by any single person. A landlords income is not producing anything useful, it’s stealing income from people actually providing society with something useful.
Drastically increase the tax rate for more than 3 houses by any single person.
I would say that it should start building the tax after one house and go drastic like you said on the 3rd.
There’s plenty of housing, it’s just not profitable to let people live there, so obviously it’s better to just leave it all empty.
200 million Americans in 1970, 340 million now. The dream of a nice house with a big yard is limited by space; space that also requires farmland, forests, parks, etc… We need dense apartment buildings, not houses.
We made a shit tin of those. Many are empty to drive prices up.
