Construction costs are currently skyrocketing

In this case not even paying taxes...

Well, the employees do pay taxes, and plenty of them at that

Google is currently expanding its location in Munich. From 1000 to 2500 employees. No company housing. The companies gladly take advantage of the positive location factor but do nothing for the location itself.

And how many of them actually work from the office? How many work remotely from somewhere?

Hey, stop it now, I can definitely show you 4-5 of your comments from last month where you wrote something about 2500€/sqm.
Where does the +500€ valuation come from now :cool:

If you keep “raising” like this here, the bubble will really come :p

Next month we'll be at 4000€/sqm :rolleyes:

But Bookstar is clever about it. He spreads sqm prices all over the internet that nobody wants to pay anymore. The media picks up on this viral effect. Then Bookstar adds another 500€, and the media report another 10% increase in construction prices. Demand and actual construction costs drop, and then Bookstar strikes and becomes a real estate mogul. ;)

And how many of them actually work from the office? How many work remotely from somewhere else?

Google was at least before Corona an office company. Hence the many extras, from food to foosball tables to massages - that was supposed to keep employees in the office. Whether that is still the case after Corona, I don't know.

Certainly, the state must be careful, every subsidy for home builders disadvantages others

That is a popular but illogical way of thinking. If I give someone something, that person has an advantage, but no one has a disadvantage.

Companies gladly take advantage of the positive location factor, but do nothing for the location itself.

Well, well, creating jobs is not something for a location?

Ultimately, it is not about creating a world in which everyone can build their townhouse, but about influencing the affordability of housing. For this, a variety of approaches are needed, which must also be locally coordinated. In some places, this can be social housing by a municipality, in others the smart designation of building land, elsewhere again densification concepts...

That is a popular but illogical way of thinking. If I give someone something as a gift, that person gains an advantage, but no one suffers a disadvantage.

Illogical only if no further assumptions are made. Implicitly, there is always the assumption: I have a given amount to give away. And if it is given away, the others receive nothing. In that respect, all those who did not receive anything do indeed suffer a disadvantage. And unfortunately, the amount to be given away is limited (any further assumptions probably require another thread and better still a study in economics as well as philosophy).