alt Hacker NewsBut, the convention in the US is that people see their houses as a form of savings. Realistically, we should account for that.
Also, if continuing the building ends up requiring some policy change (supported by changing laws and regulations)… it seems reasonable to protect normal people, doing normal things, from massive financial chaos that is explicitly caused by the government changing policies on them. At least for people actually using the houses as intended, that is, living in them.
Replies
> But, the convention in the US is that people see their houses as a form of savings.
And that is a big part of the problem. You cannot have it both ways, if housing is an investment, it will eventually lead to poorer outcomes for anybody that needs a house and does not inherit one.
>But, the convention in the US is that people see their houses as a form of savings. Realistically, we should account for that.
Why? If it makes society as a whole much poorer.
The convention is fairly recent and the cause of enormous problems.