Ownership

If we owned the block

If you had the opportunity to redevelop your entire block (or maybe just start with a group of say, 6 adjacent properties), what would you differently? Around here, I’ve got a few thoughts on what could be possible:

  • We could increase density by building smaller homes and multi-storey (low-rise) buildings.

  • We could layout the buildings so that there was minimal shading.

  • We could drop a ground-source heat pump that fed all the properties.

  • We could have vegetable gardens located at premium positions.

  • We could have warm, dry, healthier homes.

  • We could have a range of homes so that a range of people could live there, and so people wouldn’t have to move elsewhere as life circumstances changed.

  • We’d have waaaay less fences.

  • We’d probably have some shared facilities, like a workshop, children’s playground and possibly vehicles and or garage/storage space.

  • We could a central battery bank and solar panels on all the buildings to collect and share electricity, and group-buy power from the main grid.

Of course, all of this shared stuff is pretty challenging if you’re working on the assumption that we all “own our own home” in the traditional sense. But there is some form of common ownership (or non-ownership), creating some shared commons is not only easier, it becomes a natural extension of the advantage of (all) owning the block.

Where would you rather be?

Over the next ten years, would you rather live alone in a house you own yourself, or live with others in a house you all own?

It seems simple and fairly obvious on the face of it, and most of us will have an instinctive response. But we move on, I’d suggest there’s more layers to this than just property.

Here’s some things to potentially consider:

  • What kind of house are you imagining in both cases? If you’ve spent ten years living with people, you’ve probably figured out a few things, and the house probably isn’t quite the ‘normal’ kind of building. What could it look like?

  • What long-term financial assumptions are you making? In terms of your income, the cost of living, the cost of finance. And remember capital gains aren’t guaranteed, especially when continuous growth isn’t necessarily a good goal.

  • If you’ve been able to co-own property for 10 years, you’ve probably been able to do more than just share ownership. You’ve probably had more time and/or money to spend on things you want to do. You’ve probably had to experience significant personal growth in order to live the more than one other person for an extended period of time. You’ve probably shared a whole heap of life moments and memories with a small group of close friends. You’re probably more like (a functional) family than a bunch of mates (although the argument could be made that the most functional family is a bunch of mates).

  • What is the benefit of stability? Because you’ve probably lived in the same place for ten years. How many people on your street do you know? How big is your vegetable garden now?

Would you rather…

Making money off mates

Is it reasonable to complain about the price of housing, and then have your mates as flatmates to help pay the mortgage? If you’re in a fortunate enough position to buy a house, should those in a (presumably) less well-off financial position pay the price (literally) for you to continue to improve your position?

Of course, the better question is: What’s the alternative?

Probably, co-ownership. You have $100k deposit. Buy a house work (say) $500k. Split the mortgage 50/50 with a friend ($200k each). Reduce your term and pay down the mortgage. Airbnb, work from home, maybe even some short-term flatmates. Then buy a second place, and call it quits.

Sure, you’re a little bit worse off (financially). But the world’s a bit better overall.

How many people does it take to change a property system

in ,

I've been running numbers tonight.

It looks like, in order to activate about $3M of radical, purposeful, alternative property living, building, and ownership, we need a little over 100 of us.

The list looks something like this:

  • 40 people who don't own any property and currently save around $50 per week.
  • 40 people who are on the right side of the mortgage mountain, want to change the world at least a little bit, and can afford to pay an extra $50 per week on their mortgage.
  • 12 people with cash who want to change the world, but need a return.
  • 3 NGOs with cash sitting in their bank accounts.
  • A bank in the business of community-building.

And most importantly:

  • 15 people who can afford to pay $130p/w in rent and want to live with purpose; and
  • The communities around them.

100 people with Purpose.

Do any of these people sound like you?