tomder55
Jan 8, 2026, 06:35 AM
I am surprised more conservative Trump supporters haven't figured that out yet.
The narrative is that affordable housing is a big 2026 campaign issue. Last year he floated the idea of privatizing public land for the purpose .
Newsweek: Donald Trump Could Spark a Housing Revolution in Nevada | Representative Susie Lee (https://susielee.house.gov/media/in-the-news/newsweek-donald-trump-could-spark-housing-revolution-nevada)
But push comes to shove ;he thinks like a big government socialist ;not too far from the policies that Mancommie proposes.
President Donald Trump has taken to his Truth Social account to announce an initiative aimed at restricting large institutional investors from purchasing single-family homes in the U.S., a policy he says is critical to addressing the ongoing housing affordability crisis.
In the post, Trump stated that he is “immediately taking steps to ban large institutional investors from buying more single-family homes” and will urge Congress to codify the measure into law.
The White House framing of the proposal stresses that single-family housing should serve individuals and families, not corporations.
“People live in homes, not corporations,” Trump wrote,
Trump Moves To Prevent Large Investors From Buying Single-Family Homes – NMP (https://nationalmortgageprofessional.com/news/trump-moves-prevent-large-investors-buying-single-family-homes)
Is this even constitutional ? I'll have to think about that Real estate is a local issue.
But even so it is a big government intervention that is not likely to work. Large institutional investors own a very small share of the market ;no where's close enough to have monopoly control of the market.
While the data and definitions are somewhat fuzzy, we estimate below in this subsection that large institutional investors own just over 3 percent of the single-family rental stock.
20231102_THP_SingleFamilyRentals_Proposal.pdf (https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/20231102_THP_SingleFamilyRentals_Proposal.pdf)
The report does admit to a higher share in urban markets. What do institutional buyers actually do ?
“institutional investors contribute to the improvement of the local housing market by reducing vacancy rates as they shorten the amount of time distressed properties stay in REO [real estate owned foreclosure],” and that “institutional investors help lower local unemployment rates by increasing local construction employment.”6 Citing other research, the Urban Institute’s Laurie Goodman argues that institutional investors “grew up in 2010-2013 buying distressed properties that no one else would buy and in fact put a floor on the market, so they provided a very, very valuable service and they basically cleaned up the distressed market, a lot of which required repairs.”7
Michel Testimony 10-21-211.pdf (https://www.banking.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Michel%20Testimony%2010-21-211.pdf)
Yeah they are not doing it from a sense of benevolence . They do it to make a profit . As Adam Smith said
"It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. "
What that translates to in my area is institutional investors are buying abandoned textile mills and converting them into housing units for rent or purchase. The whole revitalization of the town was centered on creating a mix of housing retail surrounding park land rehabilitated from the ruins of the 20th century industries.Trump's big government solution is not much different than Mancommie's rent controls and will have the same negative effect. Properties that can be rehabilitated will sit in decay because the incentive to rehabilitate them (turning a profit ) will be removed .
You want to increase the supply of housing ? Then end some of the silly regulations against it . That of course is easier said than done as local governments pile on the largest amounts of restrictions as 'quality of life' issues. So the irony is that government , in an attempt to do good ,creates or exasperates the very issue they try to solve.
The narrative is that affordable housing is a big 2026 campaign issue. Last year he floated the idea of privatizing public land for the purpose .
Newsweek: Donald Trump Could Spark a Housing Revolution in Nevada | Representative Susie Lee (https://susielee.house.gov/media/in-the-news/newsweek-donald-trump-could-spark-housing-revolution-nevada)
But push comes to shove ;he thinks like a big government socialist ;not too far from the policies that Mancommie proposes.
President Donald Trump has taken to his Truth Social account to announce an initiative aimed at restricting large institutional investors from purchasing single-family homes in the U.S., a policy he says is critical to addressing the ongoing housing affordability crisis.
In the post, Trump stated that he is “immediately taking steps to ban large institutional investors from buying more single-family homes” and will urge Congress to codify the measure into law.
The White House framing of the proposal stresses that single-family housing should serve individuals and families, not corporations.
“People live in homes, not corporations,” Trump wrote,
Trump Moves To Prevent Large Investors From Buying Single-Family Homes – NMP (https://nationalmortgageprofessional.com/news/trump-moves-prevent-large-investors-buying-single-family-homes)
Is this even constitutional ? I'll have to think about that Real estate is a local issue.
But even so it is a big government intervention that is not likely to work. Large institutional investors own a very small share of the market ;no where's close enough to have monopoly control of the market.
While the data and definitions are somewhat fuzzy, we estimate below in this subsection that large institutional investors own just over 3 percent of the single-family rental stock.
20231102_THP_SingleFamilyRentals_Proposal.pdf (https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/20231102_THP_SingleFamilyRentals_Proposal.pdf)
The report does admit to a higher share in urban markets. What do institutional buyers actually do ?
“institutional investors contribute to the improvement of the local housing market by reducing vacancy rates as they shorten the amount of time distressed properties stay in REO [real estate owned foreclosure],” and that “institutional investors help lower local unemployment rates by increasing local construction employment.”6 Citing other research, the Urban Institute’s Laurie Goodman argues that institutional investors “grew up in 2010-2013 buying distressed properties that no one else would buy and in fact put a floor on the market, so they provided a very, very valuable service and they basically cleaned up the distressed market, a lot of which required repairs.”7
Michel Testimony 10-21-211.pdf (https://www.banking.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Michel%20Testimony%2010-21-211.pdf)
Yeah they are not doing it from a sense of benevolence . They do it to make a profit . As Adam Smith said
"It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. "
What that translates to in my area is institutional investors are buying abandoned textile mills and converting them into housing units for rent or purchase. The whole revitalization of the town was centered on creating a mix of housing retail surrounding park land rehabilitated from the ruins of the 20th century industries.Trump's big government solution is not much different than Mancommie's rent controls and will have the same negative effect. Properties that can be rehabilitated will sit in decay because the incentive to rehabilitate them (turning a profit ) will be removed .
You want to increase the supply of housing ? Then end some of the silly regulations against it . That of course is easier said than done as local governments pile on the largest amounts of restrictions as 'quality of life' issues. So the irony is that government , in an attempt to do good ,creates or exasperates the very issue they try to solve.