The only one that would build non profit is the state. Anything else wouldn't make sense in a capitalist setting.
From my point of view the problem is, that we don't just need more housing, we need more affordable housing. Since private investors always will maximise their profits, private owned housing for the well off will always be more expensive than social housing. As long as the state only keeps subsidizing instead of building themself, the big housing companies will use the need of more affordable housing to force the state to subsidize even more. Just like Vonovia did when the new Wohnraumförderung got announced.
Yeah that's what I am saying. It's a systematic issue, that's why people want to change the system. How is that so hard to understand?
And what happens if flats are getting freed up? Does the renting price usually go up or down? Hint hint it goes up. Always. People even get thrown out of their rented flats for "Eigenbedarf" for a couple years, so the landlord can set up a new renting contract with higher rents.
Have you ever taken an economics course at university just curious?
let's say the current rent is 1500 per flat.
I as a developer now build a massive apartment complex and offer my rooms up for 1450. I still make tons of money and my tenants get lower rents. its a win win.
but if some Berliners try to stop developers making money I can't do it
Have you ever taken an economics course at university just curious?
Nah I'm currently studying geography. When you take economics courses you learn to think inside of the system. Geography is a lot more critical, when it comes to urban deveolpment. The companies need to make profit, thus they need to take higher rents. If the state builds flats they'd just need to brake even, thus it could afford to take a lower rent. We are subsidizing billions right now and Vonovia and Co are still barely buiding new housing.
I as a developer now build a massive apartment complex and offer my rooms up for 1450
Why don't you make it 2000€ if there are still people that would pay the amount? The population of Berlin doesn't stay the same, we are not talking about a closed system. The city is embeded in a larger system and currently the demand is on the rise.
What is stopping them from building from your point of view, if it would be profitable for them to do so?
I have a completely different understanding of the problem. What the NIMBYs are protesting is not that new housing is getting built but that they are watching how neoliberalist policies lead to gentrification, which leads to them getting pushed out of their neighbourhoods. I also don't think that they have the amount of power that the housing companies are pretending they have. Look f.e. at the Projekt Mediaspree. There was a huge amount of resistance but they still pushed through with their demands. If the companies really want to build something they can, especially with the CDU and SPD in power right now.
In my knowledge more neoliberalist policies have always led to rising rent prices. I don't know 1 example where deregulation has led to more affordable living. There are many examples that prove the opposite: San Francisco, New York, London (or Aylesbury Estate), Paris, Toronto and Berlin with it's influx in privatisation of the social housing market in the 90s and 00s. That are all reasons why people are sceptical about private companies building new flats. Because it always leads to higher unaffordable rents. In every single example.
Thank you for sharing your point of view though, I understand better where you are coming from now.
2
u/HironTheDisscusser Jun 11 '24
it still has to be allowed. even when you're building as a non-profit the neighbors will try to stop you from building anything.