#GovernmentRegulations #CorporateOwnership #RealEstateMarket #Blackrock #SingleFamilyHouses
Hey there! π Have you ever wondered why the government doesn’t step in to stop corporations like Blackrock from buying up all the single-family houses? Let’s dive into this complex issue together! π€
Government Regulations and Corporate Ownership
When it comes to regulating corporations like Blackrock in the real estate market, the government faces a balancing act between promoting healthy competition and preventing monopolies. Here are some key points to consider:
1. Lack of Specific Regulations: Currently, there are no direct regulations prohibiting corporations from purchasing single-family houses on a large scale. This allows companies like Blackrock to invest heavily in real estate without facing strict restrictions.
2. Influence of Lobbying: Corporations often exert influence through lobbying efforts, which can shape policies in their favor. This can make it challenging for the government to enact regulations that limit corporate ownership of single-family houses.
Real Examples and Impact
To illustrate the impact of corporations like Blackrock buying up single-family houses, consider the following:
– Increase in Housing Prices: As corporations acquire more properties, it can drive up housing prices, making it harder for individual homeowners to afford homes in desirable areas.
– Rental Market Competition: Corporations owning a large portion of single-family houses can reduce rental options for individuals, potentially leading to higher rents.
– Wealth Inequality: Concentration of property ownership in the hands of corporations can exacerbate wealth inequality, as fewer individuals have the opportunity to own homes.
In conclusion, the issue of corporations like Blackrock purchasing single-family houses involves a complex interplay of government regulations, corporate influence, and real-life impacts on the housing market. As we continue to navigate these challenges, staying informed and advocating for policy changes can help shape a more equitable real estate landscape. π
Remember, your voice matters in shaping the future of housing policies! πͺ #HousingJustice #RealEstateReform
It’s not actually as bad as most think.
[Is Wall Street REALLY Buying Up All the Homes?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6pu9Ixqqxo) – youtube – The Plain Bagel
Although it is moving in that direction. I have seen some legislation against this, although I’m not sure any of it ever actually passed? Beyond being able to buy housing over value, for cash, they can also afford unlimited lobbying to allow them to do this. So be mindful who you vote for…
[BlackRock doesnβt buy single-family homes.](https://www.blackrock.com/corporate/newsroom/setting-the-record-straight/buying-houses-facts)
Because it isn’t a federal issue and they’re not actually buying up that many houses:Β Β
Β
https://slate.com/business/2021/06/blackrock-invitation-houses-investment-firms-real-estate.html
They are buying up key properties though, because they have the resources to find and exploit the good deals faster than the average person can.Β Β
Some members of Congress have proposed doing that.
Just because something is common knowledge doesn’t mean it’s true.
A friend of mine was foreman of a construction crew in the mid-2000s, bouncing around the Midwest building subdivision after subdivision. Then 2008 happened, and every one of the crews he knew stopped – first stopped building, then stopped existing. New housing starts – that is, the numbers of houses which someone has begun building – peaked at 2.2 million in 2006, and then crashed to 400k in 2008. The number has been steadily climbing since then, but now stands at 1.8.
Around 2006, the United States’ population crossed the 300 million mark. It is now at 335 million. We have added maybe 27 million houses, and we have added 35 million people. Without messing around to consider how many houses have been torn down or condemned in that time, adding more people than houses can only mean housing prices rise.
At the same time, the population of the United States has been moving in, toward the urban centers, where new housing is most difficult and expensive to build. So houses even in small cities become more expensive.
Finally, the ways in which credit is offered suffered a major blow in the 2008 crisis. Many people who were formerly able to buy houses have not been able to in the decades since. In practice, this has meant that in many places – even most places – it is much cheaper to buy a house than to rent one, if you’re among the lucky few who are able to buy.
I need not point out that that few skews to the white side.
The fact that in many places one can buy a house and then rent it for substantially more than the mortgage payment, and then be sure that you’ll be able to sell it for more than its purchase price, makes housing an insanely attractive investment. Especially in a time of high inflation, there are few investments that are so sure.
Simply put, you’ve got cause and effect reversed: corporations which buy, hold, and manage real estate are successful and flourishing because real estate prices keep going up; the prices don’t keep going up because corporations are buying the houses.
Cities have been passing laws to prevent themselves from getting too big, or from sprawling too wide, since the ’70s. We cannot build further out, and we cannot build more densely, so we are simply not building enough houses where people want to buy them. And that is why housing prices are going up.
That friend of mine who used to be a building crew foreman is now running Windows servers for an MSP, and making quite a bit more money than he’d have been building houses.
Blackrock doesn’t have the capital to come close to moving the market when private US real estate is currently valued at around $43 trillion.
Allowing Blackrock to place bids on houses is making home owners more money because they’re offering top dollar to home sellers.
Have you ever seen anything good happen to local or state office holders when they don’t allow homeowners get as much money as they can when selling their homes? I haven’t. I’ve seen plenty of them get the boot as soon as they think about approving the expansion of housing supply, which also negatively effects home prices.
You want to know who is the driving force behind exorbitant housing costs? Look at your parents and their friends who show up to town meetings and threaten to vote out anyone who cares to allow a new condo or apartment building to exist. Collectively, they’ve got more wealth tied up in their homes than 1000 BlackRocks.
Letβs say we completely banned a business from buying and owning a property.
This means that a business that wishes to buy 2-3 single family houses with idea to demolish those and build 5-6 row houses or 10 units apartment building will not be able to accomplish this.
Corporations are the one who build high density units and they need ways to buy properties.
Hedge fund house buying typically accounts for less than 1% of overall home sales so itβs really not that bad
The biggest reason housing is unaffordable is NIMBYism, not Blackrock.
The government could do far more to encourage building more housing which would actually help all of thise things you listed, rather than passing a law against one company .
I’m just a retired postal employee. Not a rich magnate. Blackrock manages my retirement fund. If they buy SF homes on my behalf, I’m appreciative. I’m a little guy. I need all the help I can get. The name Blackrock is not evil.
I would argue that blackrock or other large landlords do a far better job of being landlords than most mom and popβs. Which should provide for a better rental for the end user. The only way to get prices down is to actually have more supply.
And they donβt own 44% of homes. They may have closed 44% of sales last year. But that did not prevent anyone from buying a house.
As to why they are allowed to. Capitalism is really the only answer.
How many Russian trolls contributed bs one liners? You can stand on either side of the issue as long as you provide some evidence, but these class warfare statements in a vacuum are just trolling.
>Isnβt is common knowledge by now that one of the biggest reasons for unaffordable housing is that large corporations are buying up all the homes and then renting them out?
No, because they aren’t.
In 2023, of all homes purchased as investments, only about 0.4% were purchased by an entity that owns 1000+ homes. About 25% of all houses are purchased by investors.
So, large corporations are the buyer in about 0.1% of house sales.
Because it has no effect on housing supply and would require a lot of resources to enforce.
There is no difference between BlackRock and small, mom-and-pop landlords in their effect on the market. We should ban the mom-and-pop ones if we’re going to ban institutions.
Hate landlords? Build more housing. It will wreck them.
A house represents many peoples retirement fund. If the government forced prices down, many retirees would suffer and possible need government assistance.
How would they?
βBlackrock isnβt allowed to buy any small housesβ?
Whether the story of what Blackrock is doing is actually as bad as many people believe or just grossly over exaggerated, it’s completely legal for a corporation to do so. Congress would have to introduce legislation to make it illegal and then get that through both Houses of Congress and get a President to approve it before anything could be done. The possibility of that happening in today’s political climate is probably pretty slim, though.
Because blackrock doesn’t buy homes. They are an ETF provider.
Zoning authorities can easily limit rental properties to a quota.
Between these massive investment companies and also Air bnb style commercial residentials, about a 1/3 single family homes are not being used for single families.
Absolute failure of local government to allow this shit. Not even a federal issue. Pathetic.
No wonder prices have skyrocketed, supply has cratered by about 30%
Why should they?
Every two weeks I say the same thing;
# BLACKROCK ISN’t IN THE BUSINESS OF BUYING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
That’s other corporattions.
Inform yourself accurately on which corporations are doing what, rather than peddling mindless, inaccurate nonsense.
Unless you’re trolling for trigger, click-bait upvotes.
Blackrock doesn’t own a SINGLE single family home…
You think a company that’s worth hundreds of trillion cares about your little 300k homes? Haha
Also blackstone is buying the homes, not Blackrock. Blackrock is mainly index funds!
Because government workers own homes, their friends own homes, their family owns homes, their donors own homes. Putting restrictions on homes will reduce the cost of homes thus reducing your investment.
Short answer – the people running the government also sit on the boards of companies like Black Rock and directly benefit financially from this. And those companies also pay them, I mean *donate to their campaign in exchange for favorable votes*.
Local governments in general do nothing because all the homeowners feel like they should be able to sell to whoever they want to or do anything they want to with their own property.
The Capitalist system exists to facilitate the rise of corporate oligarchy by managing affairs on behalf of the wealthy.
Oh really??? Itβs βcommon knowledgeβ???
Well unfortunately it isnβt remotely true. Somewhere between 0.3% – 0.7% of single family homes are owned by big, evil corporations.
Do some homework before you post.
>Isnβt is common knowledge by now that one of the biggest reasons for unaffordable housing is that large corporations are buying up all the homes and then renting them out?
Because that belief is wrong. It’s [not even 2.5% of home sales](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/no-wall-street-investors-haven-015642526.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAMfLAkepNPDJlKBTnkLhC6vSUT1RMFldHTjPed59W5GlZK8-HSMgvi32rFxm9Zv1dvk1Ill0hXWTCOr3oRp_m1SAw4yCBg5XujzCEsmoqrHO7LXDzZ8nz8odv1pU0XW6VhxtRgqLNv2XqDlMQgELRa-XiqoLimYmDdMRCKzgx0Tq), but it is just easy to blame “big scary company”