For tailing it’s falling for the 80% of landlords that are “small” crying about corporate competition in their little dictatorships: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/6510977/5686588
The thought that they’d buy single family homes to rent out is novel to me at least; I’d never heard of such a thing before.
They started getting involved in SFH after the foreclosures of 08, because they did not lose much relative net worth compared to people who own 1-10 homes, who lost net worth on all their assets at that time. They didn’t get involved before that because not many people were renting SFH in the 80s and 90s and prior, those homes were only for the middling strata and up. Also, by just financing homes in the past while prices continued to rise, there was no reason to get their hands involved to add more work when they can just seek interest on all development. When hundreds of thousands of homes suddenly became available, that’s when they took the opportunity to turn it into a business. And yeah I’m minimizing them because they are indeed a minimal (0.6% of all SFH stock) component of the market and concentrated in a few markets, but that is not tied to the overall indeces of those markets whatsoever. Any investor who owns the home would have the same position as any other, corporate or “mom and pop”, the resulting market will be the same.
Liberal/Petty Bourgeois media is taking advantage of the novelty of corporate investors in SFH to use us to fight for protections backing “small investors” worth millions against competition.
Housing costs (and building) are raising extra fast post 2009 because they received basically 0% interest rates to finance more homes to “recover” from the financial crisis. That corporate investors got in at that time is a simultaneous symptom of the crisis, which always benefits the highest bourgs as they eat up small capital owners (good riddance).
There is finally the last aspect that SFH cities or neighborhoods have become the “standard model” of US housing culture since the early 2000s, this is related to the eventual financial crisis too.
For tailing it’s falling for the 80% of landlords that are “small” crying about corporate competition in their little dictatorships: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/6510977/5686588
They started getting involved in SFH after the foreclosures of 08, because they did not lose much relative net worth compared to people who own 1-10 homes, who lost net worth on all their assets at that time. They didn’t get involved before that because not many people were renting SFH in the 80s and 90s and prior, those homes were only for the middling strata and up. Also, by just financing homes in the past while prices continued to rise, there was no reason to get their hands involved to add more work when they can just seek interest on all development. When hundreds of thousands of homes suddenly became available, that’s when they took the opportunity to turn it into a business. And yeah I’m minimizing them because they are indeed a minimal (0.6% of all SFH stock) component of the market and concentrated in a few markets, but that is not tied to the overall indeces of those markets whatsoever. Any investor who owns the home would have the same position as any other, corporate or “mom and pop”, the resulting market will be the same.
Liberal/Petty Bourgeois media is taking advantage of the novelty of corporate investors in SFH to use us to fight for protections backing “small investors” worth millions against competition.
Housing costs (and building) are raising extra fast post 2009 because they received basically 0% interest rates to finance more homes to “recover” from the financial crisis. That corporate investors got in at that time is a simultaneous symptom of the crisis, which always benefits the highest bourgs as they eat up small capital owners (good riddance).
There is finally the last aspect that SFH cities or neighborhoods have become the “standard model” of US housing culture since the early 2000s, this is related to the eventual financial crisis too.