“Don’t people over 35 years old deserve to buy a house?!” In early April, Hefei, Anhui issued the latest real estate policy, stipulating that buyers who just need a house must meet the requirements of no house in the urban area, tax and social insurance for a certain period of time. It has to be “under 35 years of age”, which has aroused many doubts. The Hefei Housing Security and Real Estate Administration responded that it has not ruled out the eligibility of people over 35 years of age to buy houses, and they can participate in ordinary lottery purchases.
In recent years, Hefei has become one of the cities with the fastest rising housing prices in the country, and it is urgent to introduce a new policy to cool the property market. It cannot be denied that strengthening the supervision of the real estate market, preventing the excessively rapid rise in housing prices, and safeguarding the vital interests of the residents is a good thing for buyers with real rigid demand. However, the formulation of public policies should ensure basic fairness and demonstrate non-discriminatory treatment of people. Bundling the qualifications for buying a house with age conditions, especially “35 years old”, will intensify the anxiety of “35 years old + people reduced to labor costs” in society. At present, the “prosperity and decline” of “35 years +” adult life and career has become a controversial social phenomenon. Nowadays, many units require “the age limit to be under 35” for recruitment and examination, and some even propose “90”. The “35-year-old+” job search, job change, and job security all turn red. It doesn’t seem to be a human resource, but it is reduced to a “human cost”. Related surveys show that nearly half of job-seekers over the age of 35 have fallen from the middle-to-high-income group to the low-income group due to a decline in income, and about 90% have encountered job hunting difficulties. It is not difficult to understand why the “35-year-old +” people who have suffered from a middle-aged crisis and a career crisis are faced with a more difficult predicament to buy a house and settle down. As we all know, one of the goals of many “workers” working hard in the city is to find a sense of belonging in the city and to have a “home” in the city. Nowadays, housing prices in major cities are high, and for many people, it takes years of savings for a down payment to be able to afford it. According to the “2020 Cities Just-Needed Home Purchase Report”, in the 30 sample cities, the main force of home buyers is born in the 80s, concentrated between 29 and 38 years old, and the average home buying age is 33.2 years old. Nowadays, Hefei’s real estate policy requires people over the age of 35 who have no houses to buy houses together with non-hard-needs, restricting the age to “under 35” across the board, and mistakenly including middle-aged and hard-needs into real estate speculators In line with the law of development of things, it is also difficult to meet the livelihood expectations of many home buyers. What is the meaning of the policy of “under 35 years old is just needed to buy a house”? As we all know, the age structure of urban residents will affect the supply of urban labor, and even directly affect the trajectory of urban development. The younger population represents the “dividend” of abundant labor and employment; and if there are many elderly people, cities will face the problem of aging, and the needs of medical care and elderly care will become more prominent. Behind the policy of “buying houses under the age of 35” is the city’s intention to slow down the rate of urban aging and reduce the urban dependency ratio. However, simply excluding workers over the age of 35 from the eligibility to buy a house does not really solve the problem of urban aging. This practice of only seeking a “demographic dividend” regardless of negative effects has invisibly exposed some cities’ The exclusion of laborers. To a certain extent, this is also a variant of age discrimination, and objectively it will have the effect of “shake off the burden”. Many experts have pointed out that my country’s “demographic dividend” is gradually fading, and how to fully tap the potential labor force in the future, improve labor efficiency, and achieve “people make the most of their use” and “people make the most of their talents” is the top priority. Nowadays, the employment and housing barriers faced by the “35-year-old middle-aged crisis” have not only aggravated social anxiety and constituted “age discrimination”, but also a waste and profligacy of human resources. The “35-year-old discrimination” actually reflects the misunderstanding of the concept of employment, that is, focusing on the “cheap and easy-to-use” labor force, while ignoring the human support and resource experience reserves required for industrial transformation and upgrading and high-quality urban development. Such employment orientation can easily fall into a vicious circle of “involution”. This is true for the development of enterprises, and the same is true for the development of cities. At a time when housing prices are rising repeatedly, curbing demand for real estate is a common exploration of many cities, and many cities have also issued corresponding rules to distinguish between those who are just in need and those who are real estate speculators. There is still a long way to go to cool the property market. However, to meet the housing needs of people without housing, it is the duty of the city, not to use “35-year-old discrimination” to hurt the heart of urban workers to live and work in peace, let alone take the road of urban development.