• Immersive_Matthew@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    That is a good point but I wonder if the increased supply will impact overall prices. There is a lot of used space. I have seen % of free space but not what that means in terms of how many homes this could be turned into. Love to know if we converted all free space how big of impact it may or may not have. I suspect pretty big.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Yeah, but lots of housing sits vacant right now…

      And since these are high prices condos in metro areas… Most people who get them are going to have other homes as well.

      Which is why this money would be better used if it went to building affordable homes for people who don’t have a home

      • Immersive_Matthew@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        That is a good point. The only thing I can think of that will have an impact is if cities demand x% of low costs housing being converted from office buildings. If they are mostly targeting rich buys then yeah…what is the point.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          If they are mostly targeting rich buys then yeah…what is the point.

          I mean, it seems a safe bet Biden is doing it because people who own billion dollar office buildings tend to make large political donations… So this could just be him funneling them taxpayer money, so they give him less money in donations.

          But he says he legitimately thinks this is a good use of taxpayer money and will help the average American.

          Like most things Biden does, we have to try and figure out if he’s lying about why he’s doing it, or just really doesn’t understand the problem.

          Which is pretty depressing.

          • Immersive_Matthew@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Oh….Ahahaha. I thought we were talking about Canada. The gov here is not paying to convert, but there are developers planning as these big towers need to find a new life and fast. In theory it should add more supply, but I think we are both agreeing that it likely will not go that way…at least not enough to bring down overall house prices. Real estate is really just about the investment with the homes and offices just tenants or purchasers a distant second. It is about maintaining real estate value above all else. At least in Canada and surely the same in the USA as we are so similar.

            • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Yeah, this article is about US.

              But I do think Canada has the same problem.

              Per square foot (or however many beavers or whatever Canada uses) expensive housing earns more than an affordable one of the same size.

              So developers keep building fancy housing no one can afford that sits empty, while the lack of affordable housing causes homelessness.

              It’s technically making more housing available, just not for the people who need more housing.

              Like if there was a food shortage so the government started subsiding caviar and champagne. Sure, they’re helping with food availability, it’s just not helping anyone that actually has food insecurity