www.transicionestructural.NET es un nuevo foro, que a partir del 25/06/2012 se ha separado de su homónimo .COM. No se compartirán nuevos mensajes o usuarios a partir de dicho día.
0 Usuarios y 7 Visitantes están viendo este tema.
Señoras y señores:ahí fuera la cuerda del inmobiliario se está tensando cada vez más.A nivel anecdótico, les traigo datos del sector turístico en el que trabajo desde hace 20 años.Los procesos de selección este año han sido pírricos tanto en España como en Reino Unido (que merece análisis aparte). En España se ha pasado de 7/8 candidatos por puesto a 2/3 con un descenso notable de la calidad de los candidatos y aumento de edad. Hemos tenido muchos abandonos en periodo de formación y en algunos casos ni se presentaban después de aceptar el puesto. Mucha gente abandona el puesto por una pequeña diferencia de sueldo o beneficios. Se puede decir que en muchos casos el empleado tiene la sartén por el mango.El caso de Ibiza está siendo paradigmático y muy preocupante porque anticipa lo que puede llegar a otros como Palma o Málaga: al haber muy pocos candidatos por vacante, la empresa ha tenido que ofrecer un complemento de alrededor del 50% del SMI con respecto a península para conseguir candidatos y que estos se queden - nunca ha sido más cierto aquello de que el casero se casa con el empleador del inquilino. En empresas auxiliares como la asistencia en tierra en aeropuertos han tenido que traer empleados de otras bases como Palma con alojamiento pagado para poder cubrir servicios. El descenso en la calidad del servicio es notable y las empresas están faltas de opciones por la falta de personal creciente.Cualquier persona con la que hablas lo tiene claro: el coste inmobiliario es la causa principal y no es sostenible. Eso sí, casi todo el mundo está en contra de controlar precios.No sé ustedes, pero yo no atisbo una solución a corto plazo.
Cualquier persona con la que hablas lo tiene claro: el coste inmobiliario es la causa principal y no es sostenible. Eso sí, casi todo el mundo está en contra de controlar precios.No sé ustedes, pero yo no atisbo una solución a corto plazo.
Hoy en La Nueva España, el periódico con más tirada de Asturias, hablaban de como la tendencia era alquilar por habitaciones "para evitar la ocupación", y que no había pisos suficientes para los MIR y los de estudiantes y profesores - eso no se lo cree nadie, siempre ha habido el mismo número de MIR, y de lo demás ni hablamos porque da la risa-. Definitivamente los caseros están en guerra, y van con una chulería contra la Ley de Vivienda , como si la pudieran derogar ellos. O se les aplasta sin miramientos o la economía de mercadillo gana aunque se cargue el país, antes de la suelta del nuevo modelo de PPCC
Cita de: tomasjos en Agosto 29, 2023, 14:13:55 pmHoy en La Nueva España, el periódico con más tirada de Asturias, hablaban de como la tendencia era alquilar por habitaciones "para evitar la ocupación", y que no había pisos suficientes para los MIR y los de estudiantes y profesores - eso no se lo cree nadie, siempre ha habido el mismo número de MIR, y de lo demás ni hablamos porque da la risa-. Definitivamente los caseros están en guerra, y van con una chulería contra la Ley de Vivienda , como si la pudieran derogar ellos. O se les aplasta sin miramientos o la economía de mercadillo gana aunque se cargue el país, antes de la suelta del nuevo modelo de PPCCLa chulería denota miedo. Igual que la razón real para quitar el teletrabajo es el dinero que se ha invertido en las oficinas, el problema inmediato de los que apostaron por comprar para alquilar es que la subida del Euríbor les ha reventado. Y visto que el alquiler de vivienda habitual bloquea repercutir al bicho esa subida (me niego a usar el eufemismo de "revisar"), la salida es buscar alquileres de temporada.El problema es que es otra patada hacia adelante que durará lo que durará.Y como bien dice pollo, en NY no han tenido otra que cortar la hotelización. No sólo por la competencia desleal hacia los hoteles, que ya era conocida de sobra, sino porque ya es palpable la falta de trabajadores que no pueden ir a la ciudad porque no les salen las cuentas.Más que medidas duras, es decirle al listillo la cruda realidad: que la compra para vivir del alquiler ha sido un error garrafal. Y que ya es el propio sistema el que busca sobrevivir.
https://www.informacion.es/economia/2023/08/15/ganar-300-euros-mes-pequeno-90991956.htmlCitarCarlos Delclós es sociólogo e investigador postdoctoral en la Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona. ---Actualmente trabaja en un proyecto europeo sobre propiedad y democracia liderado por la Universidad de Gante en el que le ha tocado hacer el análisis cuantitativo, comparando datos de renta y desigualdad entre propietarios, caseros e inquilinos de distintos países.Utilizando cifras de la Encuesta de Condiciones de Vida del INE, Delclós estima que----¿En qué se diferencia el derecho a la propiedad del resto de derechos humanos? En que es el único que se basa en el derecho a excluir del lugar, demonios, por eso es territorial,¡del lugar que habitas!.
Carlos Delclós es sociólogo e investigador postdoctoral en la Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona. ---Actualmente trabaja en un proyecto europeo sobre propiedad y democracia liderado por la Universidad de Gante en el que le ha tocado hacer el análisis cuantitativo, comparando datos de renta y desigualdad entre propietarios, caseros e inquilinos de distintos países.Utilizando cifras de la Encuesta de Condiciones de Vida del INE, Delclós estima que----¿En qué se diferencia el derecho a la propiedad del resto de derechos humanos? En que es el único que se basa en el derecho a excluir del lugar, demonios, por eso es territorial,¡del lugar que habitas!.
P: Eso me recuerda a la pintada de “tu arte urbano me sube el alquiler” y a la idea de que los ‘hipsters’ no tienen la culpa de la gentrificación, sino que trabajan inconscientemente para los dueños del suelo…
Por eso Adam Smith estaba a favor de este impuesto. Un control del alquiler estatal es un problema en algunos sitios, porque el valor de la vivienda tiene una lógica profundamente territorial.
German wages rise at record pace in second quarterIncrease of 6.6% boosts consumer spending power but fuels concern about inflationary pressuresGerman wages rose at a record annual pace of 6.6 per cent in the second quarter, boosting consumer spending power but fuelling concerns about inflation being pushed up by rising labour costs.The increase, which compared with wage growth of 5.6 per cent in the previous quarter, was the highest since collection of the data began in 2008. It took German annual wage growth above the country’s consumer price inflation rate — 6.5 per cent in the period — for the first time since 2021.“Real wages have declined for three years. Now they are at least stagnant,” said Enzo Weber, head of research at the Institute for Employment Research in Nuremberg.The figures raise hopes that a rebound in German consumer spending could support the country’s economy, which has shrunk or stagnated for the past three quarters, as household incomes start to catch up with the cost of living.“For the economy it is good news as we need some degree of catch-up in wage growth to support the consumption recovery,” said Oliver Rakau, an economist at consultant Oxford Economics. “While real wages are finally turning positive, they remain well below pre-pandemic trends.”Second-quarter pay for German workers was boosted by increases in the minimum wage and one-off bonuses awarded by many companies to cushion the impact of higher inflation, according to the federal statistical office. The lowest paid fifth of the workforce enjoyed the highest wage rises, as their pay rose 11.8 per cent following last October’s increase in the minimum wage to €12 an hour. The maximum monthly earnings for tax-free, part-time “mini” jobs also rose from €450 to €520.The fastest wage growth was in sectors hit hardest by the pandemic, rising 12.6 per cent for hospitality workers, 11.9 per cent in the arts, entertainment and recreation sectors and 10 per cent in transport and warehousing.The figures could increase concern among European Central Bank policymakers about the risk of a wage-price spiral, in which high inflation pushes up labour costs and so feeds more price pressures. This could tip the balance in favour of a 10th consecutive rate rise at the ECB governing council’s next meeting on September 14, analysts say.Melanie Debono, an economist at consultant Pantheon Macroeconomics, said Germany’s wage growth “will definitely push the ECB towards a September rate hike”.However, many of the factors behind the rise in German wages were “one-time events”, such as the increase in the minimum wage and bonuses, Weber said, adding: “This is not enough for a wage-price spiral.”The GfK market research group said on Tuesday that its German consumer confidence index fell from minus 24.6 to minus 25.5 this month as people’s income expectations declined. Despite rebounding from record lows during last autumn’s energy crisis, the index remains well below consistently positive pre-pandemic levels. The ECB has predicted companies will absorb the cost of higher wages by reducing profit margins. Dirk Schumacher, an economist at French bank Natixis, said this looked likely, adding: “Weak consumption will in fact imply that corporate margins will absorb some of this.”
@Schuldensuehner Germany’s ruling Social Democratic party will propose a 3y rent freeze in a bid to clamp down on inflation and provide relief on soaring housing costs party plans to curb rent increases. Rents have this year risen at record rates across Germany — a country where the cost of housing has traditionally been stable enough for families to live in rented accommodation throughout their lives. Among Germany’s 41mn households, slightly <60% live in rented accommodation. https://ft.com/content/8dd658d3-eb29-4129-ad2a-ffee7391db69 (HT @knowledge_vital)
The Problem Isn't a Housing Shortage, It's the Concentration of Ownership by the Wealthy, Charles Hugh SmithThis concentration of housing ownership by the wealthy is the direct result of Federal Reserve and federal policies that benefit the wealthy.We're told that sky-high rents and home prices are the result of a shortage of housing. The solution is simple: build more housing.This sounds obvious, but the reality is the problem isn't a shortage, it's the concentration of housing ownership in the top 10%, the same 10% who own the majority of other income-producing assets like stocks and bonds.The problem is the wealthy are hoarding housing as just another income-producing asset to accumulate because the central bank / economic-financial policies of the past few decades have favored capital over labor and the already-wealthy who bought assets when they were cheap.The trillions of dollars in new credit have been asymmetrically distributed: the most creditworthy with the highest incomes and collateral are the top 10%, so they scooped up most of the credit. Since real estate is so heavily dependent on credit (20% down and 80% borrowed, not like stocks and bonds), this massive influx of low-cost credit led to the top 10% accumulating investment housing.In other words, the asymmetric distribution of credit concentrated ownership of housing in the hands of the few at the expense of the many. The wealthy entered bidding wars for "surplus housing" with other wealthy, a bidding process based largely on who had access to the lowest-cost credit and whose existing wealth had ballooned up more in the central bank-generated Everything Bubble.Those without existing credit-bubble-collateral or the free money issued by the Bank of Mom and Dad couldn't compete.Given these asymmetries in credit, collateral and family wealth, there was no way the wealthy wouldn't end up with the lion's share of "surplus housing," just as they ended up owning the lion's share of stocks, bonds, precious metals, cryptocurrencies, artwork, etc.There are many sources of housing-hoarding. One is inheritance. The parents move into assisted living or pass on, and since the family was wealthy enough to help the kids buy their own homes at an early age, the parent's home is "surplus capital" that stays in the family.Another is corporate buying of rental properties. Steadily rising rents (see last chart below) make rental housing a low-risk, attractive investment, so corporations tapped their credit lines or the corporate bond market to snap up tens of thousands of rental homes. Since corporate costs of capital and management are lower than those available to households, corporations can afford to be less price sensitive. Individual buyers could be outbid by corporations.A third source is the recent "investment craze" for short-term vacation rentals (STVR) as the wealthy heard stories of other wealthy people getting $10,000 a month from homes that fetched $2,000 a month as long-term rentals.This differential unleashed a tsunami of home purchases by the wealthy seeking to maximize their gains on cheap credit and "excess capital" stagnating in their accounts earning near-zero interest.In classic fashion, this land-rush frenzy to capture the outsized profits from STVR gobbled up all the housing inventory, creating credit-induced scarcity. Also in classic fashion, wealthy bidders began basing their bids not on $3,000 a month via long-term rental income, but $12,000 a month (in peak season) income from price-insensitive tourists via STVR.The deluge of "revenge spending" unleashed after the pandemic lockdowns ended supercharged the greed and acquisition of housing for short-term vacation rentals. $12,000 a month was now chump-change; the price jumped to $15,000, and soon enough, this was a "bargain" that needed another boost higher.Those desperate for vacations regardless of cost were the perfect customer base for rampant price-gouging, a.k.a. "maximizing return on investment."The true scale of this land-rush by the wealthy into STVRs is difficult to assess for various reasons. To get preferential mortgage and property tax rates, some new owners may have claimed residency or listed the new purchase as a second home. The only way to accurately assess the true scale is to tote up STVR licenses in locales that require STVR owners to obtain permits and pay annual registration fees.Consider the facts displayed below. The current housing bubble arose as a direct result of the flood of stimulus issued by the Federal Reserve and Treasury post-pandemic. Note the massive spike in investment purchases that resulted.The third chart shows that the US population rose by 4 million 2019-2023 while housing expanded by 5 million units. Um, OK, where is the scarcity when housing per capita (per person) is at record highs?The fourth chart shows that the prime home-buying cohort (ages 25-54) has flatlined since 2008, along with the number employed and thus able to obtain and pay a mortgage. What skyrocketed wasn't the number of employed home buyers--what skyrocketed was credit and central bank / government stimulus: the Fed balance sheet and holdings of mortgage-backed securities skyrocketed (fifth chart), directly goosing housing via lowering mortgage rates, and federal deficit spending.The wealthy are hoarding housing because the system has incentivized dumping "excess capital and credit" into housing. This concentration of housing ownership in the wealthy is the direct result of Federal Reserve and federal policies that benefit the wealthy.As longtime correspondent Suzanne S. put it: "I'm not sure we have a housing crisis as much as an ownership crisis."
https://twitter.com/Schuldensuehner/status/1695879562750501147Citar@Schuldensuehner Germany’s ruling Social Democratic party will propose a 3y rent freeze in a bid to clamp down on inflation and provide relief on soaring housing costs party plans to curb rent increases. Rents have this year risen at record rates across Germany — a country where the cost of housing has traditionally been stable enough for families to live in rented accommodation throughout their lives. Among Germany’s 41mn households, slightly <60% live in rented accommodation. https://ft.com/content/8dd658d3-eb29-4129-ad2a-ffee7391db69 (HT @knowledge_vital)
Welcome to the ‘nepo’ housing market: 40% of homebuyers under 30 get family money to cover their down payment(...) With the cost of homeownership consistently going up, and with interest rates being as high as they are, a lot of people can’t afford that monthly mortgage payment. That is, unless they put a lot of money down, which in some cases they get from their parents. High earners and all-cash buyers are the exception, however.“Everybody else, which is probably most people, are having to turn to family for help in order to get into the housing market,” Fairweather* said. We’re at a point when you pretty much need family money to buy a home, which itself is a testament to how unaffordable our housing market has become. But on the other hand, it’s clear that those without family money to fall back on are effectively being locked out of the market. “In the United States, we’d like to think of ourselves as a place where anybody can make it, like where you’re born or the family you’re born into doesn’t matter. But that’s increasingly not becoming the case,” Fairweather said, “because of how expensive homeownership is and the role that homeownership plays in terms of wealth accumulation.”
US home prices edge higher despite rising mortgage ratesUS home prices increased for the fifth consecutive month in June, as low housing inventory keeps pressure on demand despite high mortgage rates. Prices rose in 20 major cities, increasing 0.9 per cent on a monthly basis in June, according to the S&P Corelogic Case-Shiller index, surpassing analysts’ expectations of a 0.8 per cent rise. Prices over the preceding 12 months were down 1.2 per cent, but half of the cities in the sample now sit at all-time highs. The housing market is still sensitive to high mortgage rates and “general economic weakness”, said Craig Lazzara, managing director at S&P Dow Jones Indices.The average rate on a 30-year mortgage rate recently jumped to 7.23 per cent, according to home loan agency Freddie Mac.
https://www.oftwominds.com/blogaug23/hoarding-housing8-23.htmlCitarThe Problem Isn't a Housing Shortage, It's the Concentration of Ownership by the Wealthy, Charles Hugh SmithThis concentration of housing ownership by the wealthy is the direct result of Federal Reserve and federal policies that benefit the wealthy.We're told that sky-high rents and home prices are the result of a shortage of housing. The solution is simple: build more housing.This sounds obvious, but the reality is the problem isn't a shortage, it's the concentration of housing ownership in the top 10%, the same 10% who own the majority of other income-producing assets like stocks and bonds.The problem is the wealthy are hoarding housing as just another income-producing asset to accumulate because the central bank / economic-financial policies of the past few decades have favored capital over labor and the already-wealthy who bought assets when they were cheap.The trillions of dollars in new credit have been asymmetrically distributed: the most creditworthy with the highest incomes and collateral are the top 10%, so they scooped up most of the credit. Since real estate is so heavily dependent on credit (20% down and 80% borrowed, not like stocks and bonds), this massive influx of low-cost credit led to the top 10% accumulating investment housing.In other words, the asymmetric distribution of credit concentrated ownership of housing in the hands of the few at the expense of the many. The wealthy entered bidding wars for "surplus housing" with other wealthy, a bidding process based largely on who had access to the lowest-cost credit and whose existing wealth had ballooned up more in the central bank-generated Everything Bubble.Those without existing credit-bubble-collateral or the free money issued by the Bank of Mom and Dad couldn't compete.Given these asymmetries in credit, collateral and family wealth, there was no way the wealthy wouldn't end up with the lion's share of "surplus housing," just as they ended up owning the lion's share of stocks, bonds, precious metals, cryptocurrencies, artwork, etc.There are many sources of housing-hoarding. One is inheritance. The parents move into assisted living or pass on, and since the family was wealthy enough to help the kids buy their own homes at an early age, the parent's home is "surplus capital" that stays in the family.Another is corporate buying of rental properties. Steadily rising rents (see last chart below) make rental housing a low-risk, attractive investment, so corporations tapped their credit lines or the corporate bond market to snap up tens of thousands of rental homes. Since corporate costs of capital and management are lower than those available to households, corporations can afford to be less price sensitive. Individual buyers could be outbid by corporations.A third source is the recent "investment craze" for short-term vacation rentals (STVR) as the wealthy heard stories of other wealthy people getting $10,000 a month from homes that fetched $2,000 a month as long-term rentals.This differential unleashed a tsunami of home purchases by the wealthy seeking to maximize their gains on cheap credit and "excess capital" stagnating in their accounts earning near-zero interest.In classic fashion, this land-rush frenzy to capture the outsized profits from STVR gobbled up all the housing inventory, creating credit-induced scarcity. Also in classic fashion, wealthy bidders began basing their bids not on $3,000 a month via long-term rental income, but $12,000 a month (in peak season) income from price-insensitive tourists via STVR.The deluge of "revenge spending" unleashed after the pandemic lockdowns ended supercharged the greed and acquisition of housing for short-term vacation rentals. $12,000 a month was now chump-change; the price jumped to $15,000, and soon enough, this was a "bargain" that needed another boost higher.Those desperate for vacations regardless of cost were the perfect customer base for rampant price-gouging, a.k.a. "maximizing return on investment."The true scale of this land-rush by the wealthy into STVRs is difficult to assess for various reasons. To get preferential mortgage and property tax rates, some new owners may have claimed residency or listed the new purchase as a second home. The only way to accurately assess the true scale is to tote up STVR licenses in locales that require STVR owners to obtain permits and pay annual registration fees.Consider the facts displayed below. The current housing bubble arose as a direct result of the flood of stimulus issued by the Federal Reserve and Treasury post-pandemic. Note the massive spike in investment purchases that resulted.The third chart shows that the US population rose by 4 million 2019-2023 while housing expanded by 5 million units. Um, OK, where is the scarcity when housing per capita (per person) is at record highs?The fourth chart shows that the prime home-buying cohort (ages 25-54) has flatlined since 2008, along with the number employed and thus able to obtain and pay a mortgage. What skyrocketed wasn't the number of employed home buyers--what skyrocketed was credit and central bank / government stimulus: the Fed balance sheet and holdings of mortgage-backed securities skyrocketed (fifth chart), directly goosing housing via lowering mortgage rates, and federal deficit spending.The wealthy are hoarding housing because the system has incentivized dumping "excess capital and credit" into housing. This concentration of housing ownership in the wealthy is the direct result of Federal Reserve and federal policies that benefit the wealthy.As longtime correspondent Suzanne S. put it: "I'm not sure we have a housing crisis as much as an ownership crisis."