Kamala Harris’s housing plan is similar to a Singaporean strategy—where 90% of residents own their homes

16 comments

1. She has been the vice president for 3 and a half years. If she want to do it she would have already.

2. [deleted]

3. Majority of Singaporeans don’t own their home, they’re on a 99 year lease with the Government. 

   Only the uber wealthy outright own their homes.

4. 1/3 of Singapores residents are in the 1%

   Singapore’s wealth inequality rose 23% between 2008 and 2023

   Singapore has low corporate taxes

   Singapore has a 20% smaller population than NY City alone.

   How is any of this going to work?

5. 90% of people lease a home in Singapore, nobody truly owns anything there. A driver’s license is tens of thousands of dollars.

6. Every candidate has a plan till they step in the office.

7. I doubt it’s similar to Singapore.

   Singapore very much has a golden handcuffs society. If you stay and be good you end up with a house. They also don’t have kitchens in Singapore, they expect you to eat out at restaurants.

   It’s very much a surveillance society… emphasis on the “be good”…

8. LOL

9. Some of ya’ll in this thread and sub have been yelling that Biden has failed to come up with a solution to housing shortages. Now that the next presidential candidate is proposing a solution, ya’ll are yelling that it’s unrealistic and a president is never going to get it happen. ???

   I swear, some people don’t even know what they angry about and will never be pleased. Just admit that you will be mad no matter what a Democrat does.

10. I went to Singapore, I doubt those %

11. I hear a different plan by her almost every day. More government spending will make inflation worse. We can fix things without spending. Something simple as no foreign investor, no fund, no corporation, no business, no single entity, can own more than 3 single family homes.

12. This has no chance of passing. You need Congressional support for this. A better way to do it would be to increase the housing supply with the government by actually building houses and selling these house to first time home owners. Create a market whereby the interest rate for said homes is lower than properties financed in historic ways. The trade off would be these new homes built and sold exclusively by the government might not look as nice as traditional homes, but you would get an increase in supply. Said person looking to purchase a home would then have a couple of options.

13. Yikes. Okay before people start passing judgement on Singapore, I highly suggest you all read Lee Kuan Yew’s memoir.

    Singapore’s system and history are really quite fascinating, when you actually try to understand how they got to where they are.

14. What a joke to compare US real estate with Singapore real estate. Singapore is a small island. Its real estate tax is based on market rental value. US real estate is taxed by the local municipalities from property tax to school tax.

    Singapore real estate tax is pretty fair. Can’t say the same about US.

15. Australia used to be the landlord back in the 60s and 70s and then capitalism took over so that was fun…

16. The devil is in the details and her proposals will require careful scrutiny to determine if they’ll actually have the desired effect. But she’s at least focusing on the right problem which is the pervasive income inequality and dying American dream that has evolved over the past 40+ years as a result of all of the growth being hoarded by the ownership class while everyone else stagnates or regresses.

    This is just one of many forms of expanded ownership that we need to pursue. Another is to bring back broad-based profit-sharing plans for all workers and not just the execs.