top | item 38198659

(no title)

ptaffs | 2 years ago

maybe off topic but home ownership is one good and common way to build generational wealth (opinions/citations below) but renting or lease-holding does not realize as an asset which retains its value to be passed to children. (leases can be traded, i suppose, but have a landlord and possibility of termination). But how is generational wealth and social mobility improved or hindered by multi occupancy, high-rise living and city planning such as talked about here?

https://www.fool.com/the-ascent/mortgages/articles/this-is-w... https://www.npr.org/2023/01/04/1146960942/how-buying-a-home-...

discuss

order

globular-toast|2 years ago

It's an interesting question. Generational wealth only matters if some are able to do it while others are not. In other words, the only thing that really matters is inequality. I'd rather totally get rid of generational wealth (ie. inheritance) and have everyone start from the same place (or perhaps an adjusted position to compensate for other factors).

Spain has lower inequality than the UK and a lot lower than the US. Inequality in the US is rising, but inequality in Spain appears to be rising rapidly. This might be because those buildings are owned by private entities who are building generational wealth.

ajmurmann|2 years ago

Condos are an option to have high(er)-density and own. That said, I question if things we need for our fundamental needs are the vehicle we should chose to build inter-generational wealth. Getting prices of things we must have down, rather than up seems healthier.