[ragle]

Whether or not we are in a bubble is increasingly the wrong question to be asking in an age where failure for sufficiently-large institutions is no longer permitted.

The question used to be pretty simple: "has a sufficient portion of the market been priced out to the extent that demand collapses"?

As we've seen in equities / derivatives (and increasingly, commodity) markets - the answer to that question is now perpetually "lol, number go up" because large investment banks have essentially infinite access to free money and will be bailed out if they get in trouble.

On a long enough timeline the end result of this is that more and more Americans write their rent checks to institutional investors. [1]

Sure, many Americans own their homes now (or have a nice cushion of equity). But what happens as wage growth continues to stay relatively flat while cost of living rises dramatically and folks need money for medical bills or their kid's college tuition (or w/e)? They sell and become renters.

There's a pretty bleak future for American housing absent regulation in this space.

[1] - https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/02/singl...

[musingsole]

> more and more Americans write their rent checks to institutional investors

Homes as a wealth vehicle has been the standing wisdom for a while. That being less and less true (by virtue of requiring a higher and higher degree of wealth to even play) is scary in that there isn't an immediately obvious alternative with nearly the same odds. Also scary in that a lot (a lot a lot) of rules have been written and enshrined with the assumption of that fading wisdom.

At what point does it cross a type of pandemic level where fighting it isn't the best strategy but mitigating it and finding alternatives is the only route forward?

[treesrule]

I mean, regulation is why the housing market is so bad (SFZ environmental review etc), so really what we need is forced deregulation.

Edit: Some people might have misunderstood what I said so here's what I mean: What we really want is states to force localities to reduce zoning restrictions on new construction

[danaris]

Based on your subsequent comments, it seems like what you specifically mean is "reduce (probably zoning-based) restrictions on the construction of new residential buildings".

Phrasing this as "forced deregulation" is...not going to get people to recognize what you actually mean, because 95% of the time, when people say they want "deregulation," what they mean is they want big businesses to be allowed to exploit the middle and lower classes however the hell they want with no consequences.

If you do, in fact, mean specifically "reduce zoning restrictions on new construction", I suggest using phrasing like that, because it'll communicate your intention much more clearly. (If you don't, then I have misunderstood you, and apologize for the confusion.)

[Cd00d]

I find it suspect that environmental regulations are the driver of housing market issues.

That's a claim you should be substantiating and not making a blanket statement about.

[techrat]

Because deregulation did wonders for telecoms, energy companies in texas, boeing, subprime mortages, etc...

[minikites]

Why do you think entrenched power needs to be entrenched further? Our current situation can be traced back to deregulation:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financialization#Deregulation_...

>The securities that were so instrumental in triggering the financial crisis of 2007-2008, asset-backed securities, including collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) were practically non-existent in 1978. By 2007, they comprised $4.5 trillion in assets, equivalent to 32% of U.S. GDP.

[pibechorro]

Ding ding ding ding!

[pc86]

What exactly are you proposing be regulated?

[ragle]

Ownership of single-family residential properties by large financial institutions should be limited to their traditional role - i.e. custodial ownership of a home for the duration of a mortgage.