So there’s a ton of countries that I’ve heard have had truly unaffordable housing for decades, like:

  • The UK
  • Ireland
  • The Netherlands

And I’ve heard of a ton of countries where the cost of houses was until recently quite affordable where it’s also started getting worse:

  • Germany
  • Poland
  • Czechia
  • Hungary
  • The US
  • Australia
  • Canada
  • And I’m sure plenty others
  1. It seems to be a pan-Western bloc thing. Is the cause in all these countries the same?
  2. We’ve heard of success stories in cities like Vienna where much of the housing stock is municipally owned – but those cities have had it that way for decades. Would their system alleviate the current crisis if established in the aforementioned countries?
  3. What specific policies should I be demanding of our politicians to make housing affordable again? Is there any silver bullet? Has any country demonstrably managed to reverse this crisis yet?
  • morphballganon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    Crises are going to continue being crises as long as the wealth inequality of people worldwide continues increasing.

    Think of it like this. There’s a finite amount of money in the world. Right?

    The wealth of billionaires has doubled in the last few years. That money came from somewhere. Still with me?

    Ok, so… if the wealth of the wealthiest people has doubled, that amount of money they gained was previously held by the less wealthy, but it has now been consolidated into the wealthier people’s bank accounts.

    So. How do we solve the housing crisis (or any crisis)? Step 1 has to be to undo the consolidation of wealth. Solving crises without addressing the consolidation of wealth is a pipe dream.

    Feel free to hunt for legal mechanisms for achieving that. But I think you’ll find there are institutions and propaganda preventing those mechanisms from being effective.

      • uis@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Better than Putin Russia, that for sure.

        I think it would look like “better EU”, but EU itself would be better than in our timeline.

        • SubArcticTundra@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          I think the EU could easily be far more leftist if that’s who won in the national + EP elections. I think its constitutional design is relatively apolitical

          • uis@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            I think its constitutional design is relatively apolitical

            Relatively as long as we are talking about variations of parlamentary republic or other system without Great Leader. For example we can compare EU and USA of our timeline: one has functioning healthcare, public transport and labour laws, while other has system, that allows only for two right-wing parties to exist, both of which compete for sucking corporate dicks more. All this while election of Great Leader takes all attention from parlamentary and local elections.

            And as you have said “if that’s who won in the national + EP elections”. Having oligarchy neigbour instead of leftist one makes domestic oligarchs more likely to win.

    • SuperApples@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      It’s mostly supply and demand. In Tokyo and Osaka / satellite cities, prices are going up, everywhere else they are dirt cheap.

      However, in urban areas prices still aren’t as crazy unaffordable as you may think, because Japan has a very narrow wage gap (everyone in Japan thinks they are middle class, and their not wrong compared to other countries).

      Another thing that makes Japan different to other housing markets, and is affected by the laws, is earthquake concerns. What other countries would call ‘established’ dwellings, they call ‘second hand’. Laws are updated every ten years or so that mean newer dwellings are much safer than older ones. Knockdown/rebuild is so common that there is competitive prices, as there’s plenty of builders to choose from. The builders are also very efficient, and apart from safety law, regulations are low (you can build whatever you like, so long as it’s robust), so labour costs are much lower compared to other countries.

      If you go on Suumo.jp you’ll find plenty of very affordable houses, even in good areas/good rail links, but it’s because they don’t expect anyone will live in the house as-is - the buyer will most likely “reform” it (massive rennovation) or replace.

      The state of the Japanese housing market is due mostly to cultural/economic/low immigration. If you want a policy solution other high-income countries can use to solve housing issues, the state-capitalism solution of the Singapore HDB is the best model I’ve come across. Second would probably be Vienna’s focus on social housing.

    • weirdboy@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Home prices in (many) metro areas are riding steadily. Edit: some cities where the primary industry for the area is declining, this trend is going the other way

      In many rural areas home prices have fallen dramatically due to a combination of migration to cities and overall declining population.

      If this is a comment about homeless people, there are still plenty of homeless people all over Japan.

  • rthomas6@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    What specific policies should I be demanding of our politicians to make housing affordable again?

    The answer is Georgism combined with no zoning, but people aren’t ready to hear about that yet.

    By Georgism I mean a very high tax (80+%) on the unimproved value of land. It prevents land speculation and returns the value of the land to the public. Houses would be incredibly cheap, because you couldn’t make money by merely owning land. The only reason to own a house would be to live in it, or to provide a true service for people who would actually prefer to rent.

  • Flax@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    I think China is doing something funky, but it’s hard to get reliable information about that country

    • SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      Take what I say with a big grain of salt because I’m just an onlooker, but from what I’ve heard housing is incredibly unaffordable in the desireable cities like Beijing and Shanghai, like $600000 for a 2bdrm when the median salary is $20000. It’s a speculative investment whose bubble has burst but prices are still super inflated.

    • SubArcticTundra@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      Ooh I watched this when it was released. So essentially vast municipal ownership. Definitely something I can get behind but it takes decades.

  • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    China also has a massive homelessness problem, so it’s definitely not a “pan-Western bloc” thing. This is despite China executing every landlord and building enough homes, turns out people get assigned to a home in a region where they don’t actually live or work…

    • SubArcticTundra@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      the increased housing supply has kept private rents very affordable too.

      This is very good.

      Do you know if Austria had an Ireland-style house price problem before they did this (ie. would it halt the crisis in Ireland now), or is it more that it just prevented the crisis we see in surrounding countries from happening in Austria in the first place?

      • schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        “before they did this” for Vienna is around WW1, which was a very different time :/

        I am not very familiar with housing crises in other countries. I have lived in Vienna my whole life and now live in an apartment I own. This was possible to afford for me (a single man then in his mid-20s working as a software engineer) with a bank loan and some financial support from my family; I am not sure if it would still be possible nowadays.

      • ECB@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        They’ve been building big public housing since the 1920s. I live next to a lot of it and it’s quite high quality and really pleasant.

        Lots of cities/countries has massive public housing (the UK being a great example post WW2) but Vienna is more of an exception in that they didn’t follow the trend in the 70s-90s of privatization and stopping investment (although it did slow down at one point).

        They were the same way about their tram system, where they kept it rather than ripping it out like most places. Now everyone else wishes they so had a tram network or is trying to rebuild one.

        That being said, rents are rising here too, but they are much more reasonable to begin with. I was living in London previously, and now we spend about 30-40% less for a place over twice the size and in a nicer location. Plus finding a place was muuuuuch easier, since it’s noticeably less competitive.

  • mke_geek@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    Look at places in the U.S. who have built a lot more housing – rents and housing prices have gone down.

    1. Relax/change zoning requirements
    2. Give subsidies to developers for affordable housing
    • BigTrout75@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      There’s a bunch of available housing in my area, but it’s just super expensive. I guess building more might work. My only concern is I only see larger 3+ BR housing or shared housing behind built. The days is affordable 1 to 2 bedroom houses are over. If you want something smaller, you are stuck with condo and high HOAs. Personally, I think they should bring back trailer parks and force ownership to be local.

      • SubArcticTundra@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Trailer parks have the same problem as suburbs of being super low density. They should stack the trailers on top of each other to save space.

        Edit: ok I guess what I’m suggesting are those builders’ prefabs

      • mke_geek@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        Not everyone wants to live in a trailer park.

        Smaller housing would need to be subsidized because it costs a lot to build relative to what it could be sold for.

  • Depress_Mode@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    I suppose it depends on how you’d define “solved”. If we’re talking about basically eliminating homelessness, Cuba has done immense work in that regard. Say what you will about the Cuban government, but Cuba has a near-zero homeless population because the government has built a ton of housing and caps rent at 10% of individual income in that state-owned housing. Cuba is also a country with a tradition of multi-generational extended family homes, so there’s a greater chance that you’d be able to move in with a family member if you fell on hard times. Home ownership rate is around 85% compared to 65% in the US. All of this is nothing new, though, so it’s hard to say if it’s the answer to current issues of housing that’s largely driven by corporate greed, but it certainly sounds like it couldn’t hurt. Granted, I’ve seen people give examples of homes that are rather small and spartan, where the walls are made of bare cinderblock and generally aren’t very pretty, but that’s way better than being homeless even if some of the housing isn’t as nice as others. I’ve also examples of state-owned housing lived in by the same kinds of people, but are really quite nice as well. Whether the US government would ever do this, though, seems unlikely. Not at the scale we’d need and not for so cheap, anyway, especially not with Trump coming to office. I can’t really speak for the governments of other countries, however, and I’m no expert on Cuba either, so I could have gotten some things wrong. The US embargo to Cuba since the 90s also means that Cuba has had a more difficult time procuring building materials for the low-cost housing that’s helped so many, which has led to an increase in size and number for those extended family homes over the years.

    • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      Yeah. I was in Cuba recently. A lot of poverty but very safe (in Havana at least, where I was. Can’t speak to the rest but I’m told it’s similar). Nobody sleeping in the streets. People were fed, though with very limited choices and portion.

      Then you look at some cities in the USA, the richest country on earth and there’s people living in the streets, begging for food. You feel unsafe waiting down the street. Tons of desperation and even those with housing feel like they’re walking a tightrope.

      Not saying Cuba’s situation is “better”, it’s definitely nuanced though. And we should really see what Cuba could do if the US would stop trying to cripple it as it has for to many decades. It’s unjustifiable and disgusting.

      🇨🇺♥️

      • SubArcticTundra@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        You make a very important point about life which I realized recently: that things are not necessarily better/worse, just ‘different’.

      • luckystarr@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        Deutsch
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        In good locations: Houses depreciate in value over time because they are less safe in the event of an earthquake than newer houses.

        In bad locations: just take the house, everybody else left this town anyways.

  • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    Vienna is not as good a situation as it may look. Their public housing stock is only great if you can’t get into it. There are waitlists years long, and you have to live in the city already to be eligible to get on the waitlist. Private housing is still expensive.

    • hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      As a Finn, please stop talking about us as some kind of utopia. We haven’t solved shit and our government is infested with fascists. I’m preeetty sure there are a lot more than that out there, unless a quarter of those 1000 happen to be around my morning commute.

    • SubArcticTundra@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      That’s good to hear, although it’s kinda beyond the scope of my question. I’m asking more about how to stop prices rising when they’ve suddenly started quickly rising and people don’t know why.

        • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          It doesn’t, that’s just a bullshit, half baked “argument” people like to use when someone points out to them that Scandinavian nations have figured most of this shit out already.

          • Bender@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            I was going to let him say something obtusely racist and then roast him, but this works too.

            EDIT: He did it anyway.

          • Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 days ago

            It’s not always quite so clear-cut racist. Often it’s more about social norms and food choices. When everyone shares an insular culture, it’s easier to live near each other without having to be actively tolerant of people’s differences. And the social nets that ARE set up are more likely to work for people with a shared cultural background.

            • hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 days ago

              Shut uppppp. I live in a building that has a lot of immigrants (mostly students) and we get along just fine. That “oh I’m not racist, different cultures just can’t fit together” argument is bullshit, and even if people from different cultures don’t get along too well, it’s still better than them being outside when it’s -20 degrees.

            • Bender@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 days ago

              Hot take: blatant racism and veiled racism are equally bad reasons for a country to have poor housing policy.

              • Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 days ago

                I’m pretty sure ALL reasons are bad reasons? It doesn’t stop humans from generally being racist when it comes to housing. Which is a shame; you grow a lot more as a person when you live next to people from other cultures.

                • Bender@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Right. So in other words, we should just implement Finland’s social housing model everywhere.

      • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        True, but they could just decide to ignore homeless people like most of the US and other capitalist countries have, but they didn’t.