The idea of people controlling land remotely only makes sense if the goal is to exploit and oppress the people actually occupying said property. And troubling trends in real estate suggest that the exploitation is only going to escalate. An increasing share of so-called affordable housing is owned by banking cartels. And buying markets are probably being manipulated by the purchasing algorithms of giant companies.
Financing for home purchases is tied to a ridiculous credit system. A person can pay every bill on time for decades and still not achieve creditworthiness in this system. The only way to achieve creditworthiness in this system is to be lucky and to use financial services companies to mediate purchases. Although I've kept my utilities paid and never missed rent, chronic illness ruined my credit long ago. And illness is hardly the only form of ill fortune that ruins credit.
The financially lucky often incorrectly attribute their luck to skill. Play the game, they say, oblivious to the fact that the game is designed only to exploit the unlucky and artificially inflate prices. That's the whole game. Exploit the unlucky and inflate prices for the balance sheets of massive companies.
Millions of people are held hostage by this system, paying rents in amounts that would be sufficient for mortgages if they had access to the same credit that the big companies have. Neighborhoods are increasingly blighted by generic five story condo stacks, built by developers using their access to corporate credit. None of the popular efforts to improve the situation involve getting corporate interests out of housing. No amount of government subsidies or price controls will make the system more fair.
The solution to this problem isn't complicated. Change the rules so that occupancy of a property for a specified period of time is equal to a legal stake in the property. Maybe require landlords to own the properties they rent completely, without financiers. Rules like these might initially slow down real estate activity, causing housing prices to fall. The media would probably paint this necessary market correction as a catastrophe. But home ownership would skyrocket. And housing would become more affordable.
However attractive a solution like this may seem, the politics of it are impossible. Americans love their exploitation machines. And the real estate machine is particularly beloved. Not without reason. There are kindly and fair landlords out there. The issue is that these are far outnumbered by corporate sharks. No one really wants corporate sharks in their housing. We've just become numb to their presence.
Thinking bigger, a Universal Basic Income could solve the problem of housing access by simply providing everyone with sufficient money for housing. Due to its broad appeal, the creation of a UBI may be more politically feasible than meaningful housing reform, though neither is likely anytime soon. Instead, institutional investors will keep buying up homes for their portfolios and the working class will keep surrendering greater percentages of their paychecks to rent.
(Feature image from Pixabay.)
Read my novels:
Check out the comic I wrote:
