Si1 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 13 minutes ago, Locke said: I don't see any arguments about whether shelter value is a useful commodity which housing provides, only baseless assertions. If housing doesn't generate value, why do people buy houses, as opposed to living in tents? Why is exactly the same house priced differently based upon its geographical location? It's the utility of encompassing area that generates the value, not the housing itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 8 minutes ago, Riedquat said: That's saying there's no distinction between "has value" and "generates value." Something that creates things that have value generates value, it doesn't mean the things it creates generate value themselves. Value is entirely subjective. Some component of a house's price is based upon the expectation of someone else valuing the house enough to buy it at a given price level. This is the investment value Another component of a house's price is the shelter from the elements and protection against other people which it provides. This is the shelter value and when I say housing is productive, it is this which I am talking about Assets like artwork function similarly: they have an investment component and a productive component. The improved state of mind when looking at the art could be one productive value, or if it were hung in a museum to attract people to pay for entry, that would be another productive possibility. If you have a 3D printer which makes spaghetti makers, do those spaghetti makers not generate value? 6 minutes ago, Si1 said: It's the utility of encompassing area that generates the value, not the housing itself. The housing is the encompassed area, no? Are you saying a chain link fence around a plot of land generate the same shelter as a 3 storey house on that land? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riedquat Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 (edited) 35 minutes ago, Locke said: Value is entirely subjective. Of course it is, which is rather a problem when it comes to stuff done for economic reasons, since doing things for reasons other than it has value to someone (which may not be monetary) is pointlessly stupid. Quote If you have a 3D printer which makes spaghetti makers, do those spaghetti makers not generate value? The spaghetti makers would. Is the spaghetti they generate doing so though? Quote Are you saying a chain link fence around a plot of land generate the same shelter as a 3 storey house on that land? One might have more value than the other. Neither generate any (assuming the land isn't being used to grow crops). Edited July 17, 2017 by Riedquat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottbeard Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 On 15/07/2017 at 1:25 PM, Maynardgravy said: T'is a veritable torrent now. This surely can only be coordinated? On 15/07/2017 at 5:58 PM, Greg Bowman said: I thought that too slick and across too many outlets There's no conspiracy theory needed here - it's demographics. When the majority of the population own houses and think of them as an investment you win votes, clicks and newspaper sales with "House prices to soar!". Now that increasingly the majority of the population are realising they can't afford a house at current prices you will win votes, clicks and newspaper sales with "House prices to plummet!". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LC1 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, Locke said: Value is entirely subjective. Some component of a house's price is based upon the expectation of someone else valuing the house enough to buy it at a given price level. This is the investment value Another component of a house's price is the shelter from the elements and protection against other people which it provides. This is the shelter value and when I say housing is productive, it is this which I am talking about Assets like artwork function similarly: they have an investment component and a productive component. The improved state of mind when looking at the art could be one productive value, or if it were hung in a museum to attract people to pay for entry, that would be another productive possibility. If you have a 3D printer which makes spaghetti makers, do those spaghetti makers not generate value? The housing is the encompassed area, no? Are you saying a chain link fence around a plot of land generate the same shelter as a 3 storey house on that land? Your use of the words generate and produce are wrong in this context. Houses have properties (no pun intended) that can be valued, they don't generate or produce anything. Edited July 17, 2017 by LC1 Fat fingers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 15 hours ago, LC1 said: Your use of the words generate and produce are wrong in this context. Houses have properties (no pun intended) that can be valued, they don't generate or produce anything. Tax benefits aside, why would commercial organisations undertake charitable acts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LC1 Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 6 minutes ago, Locke said: Tax benefits aside, why would commercial organisations undertake charitable acts? Eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lavalas Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 (edited) I assume that the health benefits that a house (as opposed to a tent) facilitates can be monetised - shelter from air pollution, noise pollution, warmth, peace of mind etc. Much the same way that benefits of environmental mitigations are monetised for BCRs - noise barriers and the like. Edited July 18, 2017 by Lavalas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 8 minutes ago, LC1 said: Eh? They receive the intangible value of goodwill in their potential customers. The charity has thus "generated" this economic advantage which is the good feelings in people when they thinking about the company. Similar to the intangible value of security against theft or assault and shelter from the rain and cold. The house does not have those properties inherently; they only exist in the context of the house being occupied. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LC1 Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 3 minutes ago, Locke said: They receive the intangible value of goodwill in their potential customers. The charity has thus "generated" this economic advantage which is the good feelings in people when they thinking about the company. Similar to the intangible value of security against theft or assault and shelter from the rain and cold. The house does not have those properties inherently; they only exist in the context of the house being occupied. Semantics. And your analogy isn't really appropriate, imo. Value is a quality inherent in a thing and realised through use: it is discovered through that dynamic (why people value things differently). Houses don't generate or produce that value. A minor difference perhaps, but semantics does matter when it causes confusion as to what you're actually talking about. In an economic sense, value production and generation has a very specific meaning. Happy if you disagree, but I think that was the original point being made, and I agree with it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.