| ▲ | usernametaken29 an hour ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
We’ve established how many empty houses there are and how much further demand there will be, and guesstimated that with the current empty apartments, we can cover almost 6 years of the cities growth. That is, if you do absolutely nothing but to force people to rent their homes. Now in reality, we’ll do more than that. Both the government and public sector are and will continue to build houses. But those are just projections. The existing houses, well, exist. So let’s make sure we use them. Whenever this argument comes up people get extremely defensive for no good reason whatever. It will make a significant impact to the housing market if we force stalled housing to become available. Sure, we can and must do more than just that, but why not start with the cheapest and easiest thing we can today? Because it’s someone’s private property and we can’t even demand they rent it out in a housing crisis???? Come on now. Stop the madness. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | inglor_cz an hour ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
How many private investors will be willing to build any new houses in a city which just forcibly bought thousands of houses from someone else? The government may (let us forget, for the sake of the argument, that all major parties in Germany are NIMBY in practice), but for what money? The forced buyout was not free, the German constitution won't allow for that. They may even be sentenced to pay the full market price. That alone will make Berlin bankrupt. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||