If those bouwpromotoren just ate less avocado toast and pulled themselves up by their bootstraps they dont need a (free) loan.
Our Carrot/Stick system is so fucked up.
How about we use the stick to force people who have means to contribute more – and use the carrots for the people who actually need it.
Are we really at a point where we’re pretending renting out is somehow isn’t an income source already – even if it’s “cheap”?
How about putting an upper cap on how much rent you’re allowed to ask (like a loaf of bread) – so social housing becomes more interesting
Y’all wanted cheaper housing well guess what, the only way to do that is to build more of it.
At the current pace, it will take 250 years just to get everyone who’s currently on the waiting list into social housing. It’s not a lack of funding either. Most funding wasn’t even spent in recent years because of stifling bureaucracy.
Radical idea here, but maybe we should admit that central planning doesn’t work to satisfy the demand for housing. This 600 million is going down the drain, they’ll make some excuses on why they won’t even get close to reaching the expected targets and proceed to get let off the hook because they’re buddy-buddy with certain politicians.
perfect framework for corruption I smell
Are they serious? They can’t be serious?! Building, buying and renovating is becoming increasingly expensive for people but instead of helping said people (cut intrests on loans or btw for ‘natuurlijke’ people’s first and only house) they cut intrest on loans for companies??Companies, who build housing for profit and rent housing to people as a business so people still don’t have private property and are still suffering from increasingly more expensive rent?
Once again the government only decides “how can we use this opportunity to make select rich friends even richer, wrapped in a seemingly good effort to help the poor”. En we stonden erbij en keken ernaar…
How about they give me one of those
Foei. Geld geven aan de mensen met kapitaal in de hoop dat het armere mensen zal helpen.
een spaarfonds oprichten, (er is geld genoeg) en opkopen/bouwen en eerlijk verhuren.
En mensen met veel vastgoed belasten op inkomsten reeele of fictieve.
‘Bouwpromotoren kunnen binnenkort een renteloze lening krijgen om goedkopere huurwoningen te bouwen. In ruil moeten ze zo’n woning aanbieden met een korting van 100 à 200 euro tegenover de marktwaarde. ‘
Dat zou op zich een goed idee zijn, mochten de projectontwikkelaars ook maar enige vorm van geweten hebben en effectief denken aan de mensen voor wie ze die projecten aanbieden in plaats van hun eigen portemonnee. Bovendien zijn het net deze projectontwikkelaars die er mede voor zorgen dat de (huur)prijzen zo hard stijgen.
Misschien, heel misschien, zou het een idee zijn om de invloed van projectontwikkelaars wat aan banden te leggen zodat de prijzen in bepaalde delen van het land wat minder de pan uit swingen ?
Allow me to paint a picture for everyone bickering here.
Material costs in the construction market are going trough the roof. Many, many construction companies are considering greatly tightening up their budgets as price revisions are hitting them. This would result in a period of layoffs in the construction industry. This is bad. Not just for the people losing their jobs but because a massive industry like the construction sector making a dip tends to show a recession looming as investment in growth (new construction) is faltering.
This means that it might just be the perfect timing for the government to start a scheme like this. It will prolong the life of the construction industry and we get something useful out of it. Social housing. By providing a lot of low cost housing we can reduce the pressure on the prices of non social housing rent. Generally because the price of rent and the price of property is linked to each other this will also reduce the cost of buying a house.
Of course this could mean with the increase of material cost that the incentive to build private housing will decrease. As the cost rises but the price might drop but as they are still building units for people to live in I don’t see this as an issue.
TL,DR. By allowing the construction industry low risk investment into social housing they might be kept afloat as well as reduce the cost of housing altogether.
this is just stupid. how about we limit the amount of homes a owner can own.
because currently all the housing is getting either build by big corps or bought up by big corps so middle class cant buy them to live in and because they control the supply the lower class cant rent it either
also need to limit foreing investment in our real estate because othewise we will end like like canada,netherland,uk where everything near a city and in city becomes insanely priced
14 comments
Ah yes, let’s subsidize the rich, that will help…
/s
If those bouwpromotoren just ate less avocado toast and pulled themselves up by their bootstraps they dont need a (free) loan.
Our Carrot/Stick system is so fucked up.
How about we use the stick to force people who have means to contribute more – and use the carrots for the people who actually need it.
Are we really at a point where we’re pretending renting out is somehow isn’t an income source already – even if it’s “cheap”?
How about putting an upper cap on how much rent you’re allowed to ask (like a loaf of bread) – so social housing becomes more interesting
Y’all wanted cheaper housing well guess what, the only way to do that is to build more of it.
At the current pace, it will take 250 years just to get everyone who’s currently on the waiting list into social housing. It’s not a lack of funding either. Most funding wasn’t even spent in recent years because of stifling bureaucracy.
Radical idea here, but maybe we should admit that central planning doesn’t work to satisfy the demand for housing. This 600 million is going down the drain, they’ll make some excuses on why they won’t even get close to reaching the expected targets and proceed to get let off the hook because they’re buddy-buddy with certain politicians.
perfect framework for corruption I smell
Are they serious? They can’t be serious?! Building, buying and renovating is becoming increasingly expensive for people but instead of helping said people (cut intrests on loans or btw for ‘natuurlijke’ people’s first and only house) they cut intrest on loans for companies??Companies, who build housing for profit and rent housing to people as a business so people still don’t have private property and are still suffering from increasingly more expensive rent?
Once again the government only decides “how can we use this opportunity to make select rich friends even richer, wrapped in a seemingly good effort to help the poor”. En we stonden erbij en keken ernaar…
How about they give me one of those
Foei. Geld geven aan de mensen met kapitaal in de hoop dat het armere mensen zal helpen.
een spaarfonds oprichten, (er is geld genoeg) en opkopen/bouwen en eerlijk verhuren.
En mensen met veel vastgoed belasten op inkomsten reeele of fictieve.
‘Bouwpromotoren kunnen binnenkort een renteloze lening krijgen om goedkopere huurwoningen te bouwen. In ruil moeten ze zo’n woning aanbieden met een korting van 100 à 200 euro tegenover de marktwaarde. ‘
Dat zou op zich een goed idee zijn, mochten de projectontwikkelaars ook maar enige vorm van geweten hebben en effectief denken aan de mensen voor wie ze die projecten aanbieden in plaats van hun eigen portemonnee. Bovendien zijn het net deze projectontwikkelaars die er mede voor zorgen dat de (huur)prijzen zo hard stijgen.
Misschien, heel misschien, zou het een idee zijn om de invloed van projectontwikkelaars wat aan banden te leggen zodat de prijzen in bepaalde delen van het land wat minder de pan uit swingen ?
Allow me to paint a picture for everyone bickering here.
Material costs in the construction market are going trough the roof. Many, many construction companies are considering greatly tightening up their budgets as price revisions are hitting them. This would result in a period of layoffs in the construction industry. This is bad. Not just for the people losing their jobs but because a massive industry like the construction sector making a dip tends to show a recession looming as investment in growth (new construction) is faltering.
This means that it might just be the perfect timing for the government to start a scheme like this. It will prolong the life of the construction industry and we get something useful out of it. Social housing. By providing a lot of low cost housing we can reduce the pressure on the prices of non social housing rent. Generally because the price of rent and the price of property is linked to each other this will also reduce the cost of buying a house.
Of course this could mean with the increase of material cost that the incentive to build private housing will decrease. As the cost rises but the price might drop but as they are still building units for people to live in I don’t see this as an issue.
TL,DR. By allowing the construction industry low risk investment into social housing they might be kept afloat as well as reduce the cost of housing altogether.
this is just stupid. how about we limit the amount of homes a owner can own.
because currently all the housing is getting either build by big corps or bought up by big corps so middle class cant buy them to live in and because they control the supply the lower class cant rent it either
also need to limit foreing investment in our real estate because othewise we will end like like canada,netherland,uk where everything near a city and in city becomes insanely priced
Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor.
What absolute disdain for anyone not rich.
Van der Paal krijgt vind dit leuk!