Especially when those 2nd, 3rd, + properties are being used as passive short term rentals. Observing the state of the housing situation “Hmm there aren’t enough homes for normal families to each have a chance, I should turn this extra property of mine into a vacation rental.” does this make said person a POS?

  • flamingo_pinyata@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Imo, the ethical limit is 3.

    1. To live in
    2. For additional income from rental, retirement security etc.
    3. A country or seaside house for weekend/summer getaway

    There’s no real reason to own more property than that. If you have extra money to invest put it in actual business. Into new housing construction for example you get quite a return on that, and it doesn’t make you unethical.

    Edit: This also applies to companies. Actually companies shouldn’t own any housing at all. Selling at a profit that’s acceptable. Owning it as an ‘investment’ - absolutely not.

    • Chip_Rat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      If we are just putting our own ethical limit, for me it’s 2.

      1. Main residence, a traditional home like house, townhome, condo, whatever, but with full service like garbage hydro ect as is standard for the area.

      2. Land, sort of what you are saying a country home, but it has to be zoned as such, not just another home in someone else’s neighbourhood. So purpose built seasonal homes, or off-grid properties with an outhouse. Not somewhere most people would be comfortable living as their primary residence year round.

      After that taxes should be extreme. And companies should not be able to purchase the main residence type homes. At all. Must be a person purchasing.