|
If you have largely or wholly negative feelings about gentrification consider the situation in London, which is commodification. Because of the insane property prices and the astronomical rise in value (due to limited supply, increasing demand, increasing commercial centralisation and more internationalisation of London) this now happens: super rich buyers all over the world buy properties in London for investment purposes. They don't live there, they don't even rent out the properties. They simply hold the property in a portfolio for 2 or 3 years then sell at approx. 30-40% return. You aren't obliged to pay city tax (no city tax), no income tax (if you aren't resident), no capital gains tax (if you aren't resident). I'm not sure if you are even hit by council tax (refuse cleaning, street repairs, etc) if you aren't resident. This trend of foreign owner non-occupiers buying for investment and not renting out has resulted in thousands of empty properties across a city already chronically under-supplied with rental property. Whole residential developments have been sold off-plan and are sold and empty - awaiting trade to the next investment buyer. The competition by wealthy buyers has driven up prices. So London has a perfect storm of being very expensive for cost of living, expensive to rent in, extremely expensive to buy in (with relatively little liquidity and high competition), low in supply, high in demand > ever-rising prices > greater appeal of London property as pure investment. E: The Thatcher government (1980s) just about wiped out social housing rented to the poor at reasonable rates by local councils, so London has lost much of its low(er) cost rental property. Additionally, local authority regulations stipulating any development has 20% "affordable" properties is pretty much ignored. Developers rules lawyer it and state that at market prices £200,000 is "affordable". Other times developers don't build any affordable properties and are not sanctioned for it. Reading material: http://money.cnn.com/2014/03/27/news/economy/london-hong-kong-property/index.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26980299 Is it easing off? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...n-property.html Josef K. Sourdust fucked around with this message at 13:21 on Feb 24, 2015 |
#
¿
Feb 24, 2015 10:53
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 18:25 |
|
|
 SA is a gated community, keeping the poors out and you love it. You wouldn't want it any other way, you drat plutocrats.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2015 10:57
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:Kind of depends on the time scale. If the evolution of the area is New neighborhood ---> lovely neighborhood ---> Gentrified neighborhood then sure at some point they were popular but when gentrification occurred they weren't. Not necessarily. In many cases inner-city areas now gentrified were originally manufacturing/warehousing/commercial properties or zones that were abandoned or sold off cheaply and were then occupied by artists,musicians, squatters and immigrants because it was available, cheap/free and central. Richer people move in when that area becomes fashionable and large buildings can be converted into apartments. That has certainly been the model in much of Europe and I hear it's also true of the US's larger cities. Josef K. Sourdust fucked around with this message at 13:14 on Feb 27, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 13:12
|
|