The global housing market (and me)
OutOfBreath
Posts: 1,804
Is it a bubble waiting to burst horribly at some point, or can that kind of growth actually be maintained? It is particularly important for Norway since so many own their own homes, and it is government policy that it is best to own your own house. The growth in the norwegian market has been insane the last decade, right after we took a real nose-dive in the late eighties for a bit.
I got to thinking on this, since I've just bought an apartment with my girlfriend. Walking distance (20 minutes) from the centre of Bergen, about 70 square metres in size. The cost? About 310.000 US$
I am still reeling from the cost of it, myself. But maybe it's just the blues for the kickoff of my lifetime indebtedness to the banks, I dunno. But it's gonna be nice to have our own place, and no landlord to worry about.
Peace
Dan
I got to thinking on this, since I've just bought an apartment with my girlfriend. Walking distance (20 minutes) from the centre of Bergen, about 70 square metres in size. The cost? About 310.000 US$
I am still reeling from the cost of it, myself. But maybe it's just the blues for the kickoff of my lifetime indebtedness to the banks, I dunno. But it's gonna be nice to have our own place, and no landlord to worry about.
Peace
Dan
"YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
I guess, it shouldn't. No one should own the earth. Those who do not own any land lose the right to access owned land. One negates the other.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Bet you never expected that from me.
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
You are right, I wouldn't
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
I would trust it if it's a true democracy ruled by the people. Education and participation have to be wide spread and encouraged from a young age for this vision to be realized. Definitely a worthwhile goal, I'd say
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I struggle with the concept of land ownership myself. Of course, in your example above it would be the government that owned that land, and where I struggle is trying to figure out how land could even be ownable.
(and I just sold my house and am in the process of buying a new one)
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Many Native North Americans had this same philosopht but without a central government they wee nearly always at war over disputed land. Which really goes to show they believed in ownership, and only professed otherwise.
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
Here's a quote that comes to mind when discussing nation building and land conflicts. It says to me that we take pride in owning the Earth and will kill to maintain our ownership of it.
"Conceit, arrogance and egotism are the essentials of patriotism.... Patriotism assumes that our globe is divided into little spots, each one surrounded by an iron gate. Those who had the fortune of being born on some particular spot, consider themselves better, nobler, grander, more intelligent than the living beings inhabiting any other spot. It is, therefore, the duty of everyone living on that chosen spot to fight, kill, and die in the attempt to impose his superiority upon all others." Emma Goldman
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
:eek:
How is giving one organization ownership of all land "doing away with land ownership"?
I'll toast to Emma Goldman....
And because they were hunter-gatherers they never had the need for a philosophy of "owning land".
No one has a divine right to dirt. The right to dirt extends from its use, not its Creator.
Many Native North Americans had this same philosopht but without a central government they wee nearly always at war over disputed land. Which really goes to show they believed in ownership, and only professed otherwise.[/quote"]
True, but there were also many other First nations that lived at peace with each other and shared the land without going to war so they may not have been so adamant about land ownership. In fact, most nomadic FN groups likely shared land peacefully at some point annually without conflict. Secondly, although they may have claimed territory rights for their own groups, they didn't so much believe in private property in the family or individual level.
"Public" ownership = no stewardship. When people own something they genrally care for its continuation and increase in value.
There can be regulation to discourage misuse.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
I'm not complaining, so go about your business by all means. Looking good so far.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
But for the entire ownership debate, I feel it somewhat beside the point. One thing is whether someone has ultimate right to a piece of land. the question is how are we gonna separate "mine" from "yours" otherwise? Only so many can live on said piece of land, and they all want the best spot for themselves. How else to resolve that other than through some kind of ownership or related right? I can agree that ownership should perhaps have limits, but when we get right down to personal space, your home, your belongings, your family. How to decide who can be where? The current system works by size of wallet. That is one way. Is other solutions preferable or wanted? I dunno. But I do think steps can be taken to cool down the housing market, and perhaps stabilize prices, or at least reduce their growth. When you have to pay more than 300.000 US$ for a small 2-room apartment a bit outside the city, well...
But I'm gonna do just fine probably, so no worries there. If the course is kept, I can resell it in 5-10 years, and make a handsome profit. But I do see signs of an out of control system here.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
And I sure don't agree with people owning the land. As you can't bury your family on your plot of land anymore. You can't really do too much with your house or land without a permit. But since they want us humans to play so many of their games. This is one I don't mind playing. Considering they rape you for rent, if you got the down, go for it.
And although I can somewhat sympathize with a conflict perspective you seem to lay out here, I find that such a perspective isn't very fruitful always. When it comes to housing, at least in Norway, the majority of people are home-owners, hence the tyrants are to an extent ourselves then. Of course there are shady actors in the market, and dont get me started on real estate agents and their role.
But it's not necessarily a conspiracy by "the man" to wrench out one's dollars that things cost money. In this case, I am questioning the high cost, not a cost in itself. And if you wanna go the conflict line all the way, then as long as you live in a society you are screwed anyways.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
There is enough land on this planet to give every man, woman, and child roughly 20 acres for themselves. Now, obviously not all this land is great for habitation but the fact remains that there is no land crisis in this world.
The math doesn't support my assertion? Then how are 6,000,000,000 currently surviving off of less than half of the arable land on earth? Magic?
Furthermore, as far as city density goes, it is impossible to efficiently continue to build out and away from where jobs are in sprawling neighbourhoods. See Seattle...
The "vast majority" of the earth's population lives in the "vast majority" of the world's land space. Non-North American and European territory account for over 60% of the world's land space.
Certainly most people in these territories don't enjoy "such luxuries". Should they? Will they? Perhaps. But that is not the problem the environmentalists want to turn it into. Your "ecological footprint" site, for example, tells me that my lifestyle takes 15 acres and therefore "requires" roughly 4 Earths by multiplying 15 * 6,000,000,000. What it doesn't consider is that I don't need 15 acres for myself alone. Who's math doesn't add up here?
Who in god's name expects that?
Trust me I understand why, I just don't understand it being called real estate. Aside from being an eye sore. They are meant for city dwelling. Most people move away from the city to enjoy some space for themselves. That is why I did it. I can't stand people, better yet, them being right on top of me.