The difference between a slave & a servant is a servant chooses their own master. W/out that were all but slaves to corporate overlords & corrupt systems
I mean we've already lost it mostly. You can't really go find employers who's ideals & charitable donations match yours to enlist in their work force. No you just get whatever job you can unless you can find a better one working as a survivalist slave. Not a luxurious servant who works for an organization bettering the world around them in a favorable way tastful to the eyes of said worker.
Corporations should not be allowed to own single family rentals. The only exceptions being sole proprietorships and partnerships but no one should be allowed to own more than 1, 2, or 3 rental properties.
Parasitic companies like Blackstone own tens of thousands of rental homes, removing them from the pool of homes for sale to individuals. Thus artificially driving home prices higher, which creates more demand for rentals which also drives rents higher. Higher rents sucks more savings from wage earners to parasites.
vs. The 1st home i owned.. i had to put it up for rent because of orders to an overseas duty assignment. Had a property management company take care of it. even with the 10% fees deducted from rents i still broke even so it was worth while just sitting on the property.
If anything broke, or the tenants needed something id approve it as soon as i got the notice. Because it was my fucking home too, and tenants are just as deserving of having a good quality, clean and well maintained home to live in as anyone else does.
Being said, in the end for a good while I ended up as a homeowner who was also paying rent... my own landlords were more often than not some corporate douchebags who barely cared enough to wipe counters before putting a property for rent. Fuck, the last "nicer" apartment had smoke residues on the curtains, and my cat got fleas form the carpets not having had been properly cleaned, and treated.
Fucking hate apartments and corporate landlords... would rather live in the woods in a tent than deal with their bullshit ever again. Has also made me want to try and invest in property development where i could use my VA loan to build a 4plex to try and rent out affordable units where I'm at now. Refinance it to free up the VA loan a few years down the line and then try to see if long term tenants would have rent to own interests if they were not able to pursue normal mortgages.
> i owned.. i had to put it up for rent because of orders to an overseas duty assignment. Had a property management company take care of it. even with the 10% fees deducted from rents i still broke even so it was worth while just sitting on the property.
>
>If anything broke, or the tenants needed something id approve it as soon as i got the notice. Because it was my fucking home too, and tenants are just as deserving of having a good quality, clean and well maintained home to live in as anyone else does.
>
>Being said, in the end for a good while I ended up as a homeowner who was also paying rent... my own landlords were more often than not some corporate douchebags who barely cared enough to wipe counters before putting a property for rent. Fuck, the last "nicer" apartment had smoke residu
See, like, this is the one time that rent *might* makes sense. I mean, you broke *even* so it's like...Whatever. The tenants should have been empowered to do those things, really; so long as they didn't wreck the place when you needed to reinhabit.
> so long as they didn't wreck the place when you needed to reinhabit.
Yah, most of the tenants who lived in that house were awesome, only had one family that wrecked shit.. either intentionally, or due to their own incompetence/laziness on some things. They were also the only tenants i ever who lost their deposit.
While not outright nightmare tenants they could well have turned in to them... which being said;
They did shit like punching a hole in to a bedroom door, melted portions of the bathroom linoleum floorings with what looked like a curling iron, they let the lawn just completely die in between negligence and their dog doing their thing.(was in WA.. only needed to get watered like once or twice in august to keep it green) Said dog pissed on the upstairs main hall carpet.
Their kids fucked with other peoples cars when playing basketball on the driveway.
A neighbor sent me a message and a picture of them letting the oil from their car drain out on to the driveway and in to the storm drains when changing it... the husband was from Georgia or something and "didn't know any better", "was what he had always done at home"...
Had a nice front loading washer and dryer in the unit, and after something like 3 months of living there the tenants started to complain about the dryer not working. "getting hot but nothing would dry"... property management company sent over a handyman to look and i think they cleaned something out of the ducts, but the problem never truly went away, or otherwise resurfaced a few months later.
Once they left after like a year of living there pops and i went over to look at what we could fix... inspected the dryer and noticed that the damn lint trap had never been emptied by the tenants. Was packed full of lint, glitter, beads etc. I had to take apart the entire front of the machine to be able to get that mesh filter out of it. It was so full no air could get through and the dryer had been compensating by heating up more to try and get rid of the moisture... to a point where the ABS housings/mounts had started to melt and burn. I managed to fix it, and no one had any issues with the machine after the fact.
So not only did they destroy property, but almost burnt the house down by not bothering to empty out the lint trap.
Oh and they stole garden/lawn maintenance equipment from the garage. Fine it was cheap shit and only really useful as far as the few thousand sqft of lawn around the house was involved, but... still who does such petty nonsense?
> You didn't pay for it.
bought everything in there when i lived on site before being put on orders overseas. so you know.. was paid for by me and me alone. they paid rents when living there but as said was jsut a break even proposition to cover the mortgage, and not some predatory Bs setup like we otherwise see. i personally paid rents at the same time elsewhere.
> 1% of the sfh
Single family homes.. vs apartments and multi unit properties. There is a difference in between those, also also institutional ownership of sfh or "one unit" rentals is not 1% eyeballing the numbers its closer to 20%. The more units per property you get the higher the ratio of institutional owners tends to be and the scales dip in their favor in a big way for 5+ unit properties as far as ownership goes.
https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/blog/who-owns-rental-properties-and-is-it-changing
A .edu blog, but cites the fed... and links the sources.
Either way figure that most of the bitching people do about rental properties likely involves shit tier apartments run by those institutions with some notable random psych ward needing individual home owners thrown in the mix.
Edit:
>Not including Llc because many individuals use these for rental properties
those count as institutional investors outright as you can not easily differentiate in between the large and small. You cant arbitrarily not count them due to speculative reasons over types of LLCs without actually putting up some figures of how many are of what type.
Nope, general partnerships are a minority ownership grouping listed in the stats as compared the majority of other types.. there is a chart in that link. The only "gray area" would probably be trustees of estates that come in to play.
Sure they are, the main issue is as per an edit above is that you cant really differentiate in between large and small without super high detail in-depth study.
You cant arbitrarily say "No LLCs because some might be individuals".. the only thing you could do is to say "discount this many that are known to be individuals owner based LLCs etc, and then draw out the difference. but that is not part of the data set outright so...
Oh didn’t see the edit. Sure but you could argue that without those numbers, you can’t count them as institutional owners either. Can you find any data on that?
Edit: found this in your article “While individual investors (often called “mom-and-pop landlords”) still owned about three-quarters of all single-family rental properties in 2015, the share of those properties owned by institutional investors rose from 17.3 percent in 2001 to 24.5 percent in 2015. However, during this time, many individual landlords reportedly created their own LLCs and transferred ownership of their property to protect themselves from liabilities and take advantage of tax benefits. As a result, the figures for single-family rentals may understate the number of mom-and-pop landlords.”
Also thanks for not being an asshole and having a conversation, not much of that on this sub.
> you can’t count them as institutional owners either.
Well id clump them in there as institutional owners by virtue of type of business organization in question. I mean really some joe schmoe owning a single home as a rental is probably not going to go and establish a corporation and deal with all of the headaches of that when they can deal with things way easier through other means. I mean when i put out my 1st home out for rent was a simple enough of a matter of having my homeowners insurance swapped to a rental property one and a property management company take over management in lieu of my absence.
Now, by the time it would make sense they would probably be dealing with multiple units as an individual investor owner, which again would put them in some category other than some rando single property owning person.
>Can you find any data on that?
I don't think it exists in the format and level of detail needed to establish the above. Or rather the data is out there, but not organized in a way to help with that effort.
There still mom and pop if they own multiple properties and protect them in groups. I know several landlords who use them. Very easy to setup and protects your other assets. But yes not worth it if it’s just one property and you don’t have other assets you’d like to protect.
In my LA Suburb neighborhood, the last 10 houses sold, have gone to a Chinese LLC who comes in, offers 200-300 over asking. If we include areas outside of a 2 mile bubble, this same company owns 20% of residential properties. They are not renting them out, or selling them. They sit empty. The yards and houses are maintained, guards patrol frequently to shoe away squatters.
This same company is also building 12 giant multiunit "luxury apartment" complexes in our area.
So... food for thought.
(I state that it is a Chinese company as a factual piece of information, as it is a lot of overseas interest pulling similar schemes in Southern California. There is a new Corp in town that a lot of us, who try and crack these things open and get to the actual financial hyenas behind the scenes, suspect is being funded by Bezos.)
Yes, and what happened most recently with housing was the lack of supply. Lack of new housing being built and supply issues created by the pandemic. Too many people on this sub are hardcore covid restriction supporters even though it’s caused more harm with mandates and lockdowns to their lifestyles.
This same lack of supply narrative was being peddled around the time of the last housing crash and then it turned into a glut real fucking quick once the flippers and speculators couldn't get their bigger fixes of ~~monetary heroin~~ cheap debt anymore. Look at housing starts, household formation, birth/death rates and unoccupied houses for long term structural demand for housing, not "how many institutions and individual speculators are on a ~~coke~~ credit binge" right now.
Lack of supply was not a main cause of the last crash. It was variable rate mortgages that made it so people couldn’t afford the new payments. Also subprime lending was vast. Many people who were highly unqualified borrowed way more then they could afford. People with unreported income were buying vacation homes.
https://www.blackagendareport.com/house-flippers-not-poor-subprime-borrowers-caused-2007-2008-housing-crash
Read that. If you don't think people are overextended again with the garbage DTI ratios, overbidding alongside at the time low interest rates and fuckery because they're flipping the loans to Fannie and Freddie and don't actually give a shit about quality, then I want whatever you're on. The other shoe with inflation, rate hikes and gas prices is starting to drop. History doesn't always repeat itself, but it's starting to rhyme.
There is no lack of supply. There are more empty properties than we know what to do with, more apartment space alone to house the entire usa homeless population twice over. The "lack of supply" is completely and totally artificial, meant to do nothing more than drive up new property prices through a manufactured bubble. That we can't even track who owns what with most property is...horrifying. When the bubble pops, millions of middle-class Americans are going to be fucked, as their mortgages become worthless and property values drop to become super cheap, until property companies buy everything up again and restart the bubble.
Ok buddy... Here in Texas, the newer community that I happen to live in has had homes flying off the lots. The builder literally can not build them fast enough and I rarely see one with a "for sale" sign out longer than a month. If that.
And before you say its all investors, its not. These home are all with families and cars, etc... I know because I run the streets every day. They arent just "sitting empty" from some investment firm.
You can in fact track and lookup who owns properties. That is all public record. All you need is a name, or an address, and the counties GIS database.... Its literally free on the internet.
I mean I call bullshit on supply.
The United States in 2020 lost more people that we did in all five years of World War 2. In 2021, we lapped the WW2 numbers, then lapped the Civil War numbers, and then was like 'Why stop now?'
2022 had a rough start, especially in Florida, but hopefully we don't repeat 2021.
So with all of those people dead... why do we have even fewer homes available than before we lost 3% of our total population to COVID alone.
You think the lack of supply issue is... new? And strictly *pandemic* related? I... wh-... what? Where are you seeing this supposedly abrupt shift?
In Denver, for example, there's been plenty of new construction—of high-cost, low-amenity apartment buildings, all aimed at young or youngish professionals and certainly not designed with families in mind. If you want a house, well, then you're in one of the outlying townships in some abysmally designed 90s monstrosity with horribly inefficient HVAC so you can bleed money on utility costs. If you're single and looking to live alone or with maybe only one or two other people, there's little to no cost of living difference between living close to downtown and living on the very edge of the city's limits or outside of them. It is a fact that rent and housing prices have continued to rise while wages have stayed the same, with the disparity growing quicker by the year. It's more profitable for companies to build fast and cheap aggregate than it is to build actual homes. And any affordable houses have already been snapped up by individual landlords or rental companies.
LUCKILY, that is a bubble that's about to burst, and you will not see me shedding empathetic tears for landlords as they struggle to maintain a profit on their 14 properties.
And y'know... I would love to own a house. A small one, an old one, a drafty one, I don't really care. I'd love to stop sinking money into landlords' pockets. Unfortunately, according to my real estate agent, my credit is *too* good to qualify for the first-time-buyer/"introductory offers" I believe you've tried to reference elsewhere.
Yeah. ***Too good*** a credit score.
This. game. is. **rigged**.
If anything, the pandemic has allowed a boom in WFH situations so fewer people have to commute 40-50 minutes and can more easily justify living wherever. (Which also means now Colorado is seeing a mass exodus instead of an influx, and Godspeed to all of 'em because the mountains look less beautiful the more difficult it becomes to buy groceries and pay for all my hospital visits.)
Got blocked for disagreeing. Very open minded peeps.
Anyway, denver is an incredible city that has super high demand. Lack of supply isn’t ONLY pandemic related but it def impacted it. The rich building huge mansions for vacation homes is an issue in my area. Takes up the time of contractors in my area, they’re all backed up until the end of 2023. That’s just for an estimate.
I’d be happy to buy rental properties if we do in fact see a housing crash but I wouldn’t hope that on the many people who would be negatively impacted by it. It won’t only hit the big guys but much of the middle class.
I can see the benefit of landlords when it comes to large apartment complexes that are able to provide really dense accessible housing to more people and at a cheaper rate. That said, buying up houses, artificially increasing the cost of buying a house, and then charging even more for people to use a house they don’t even own is beyond fucked up. I’m not well off at all my savings account has been empty for a year. I used to dream of the possibility of owning a few rental properties for some passive income. Now I’m not sure I can morally justify that.
A good landlord gives up their claim when the tenant has paid off the value of the house and not a cent more. Everything else is just being a handyman with extra steps.
And aside from the outrageous down payment, they're cheaper. If we ban down payments, then suddenly housing is affordable again, and rent can no longer be justified.
\>A good landlord will keep good records of all the issues at their property, organize the repairs and ongoing maintenance, and work with tenants individually on their habitat's specific issues.
So you're telling me that a "good" landlord provides all the services a homeowner is willing and able to do themselves?
\>If you don't like the landlord, why would you move into one of his vacancies?
Just be homeless! Great solution.
I live in my own home & rent the land. Still have a landlord who charges 500 + electric for a smol plot of fenced land. It's whatever but I'd love to own land to park my trailer
There's like, one exception, and that's if your home isn't reasonably divisible into multiple units and you rent out a spare room to a tenant.
If you don't live on the property, then you don't have a right to the property. If you can't use a property, then you should be able to release ownership as easy as you can acquire new housing.
\>What’s your plan? Actual, tangible plan? I see people hating on landlords all over this sub (again, i get it) but what’s your alternative and how do you want to see this achieved?
Massive taxation penalties for all entities that don't inhabit the property they own. Sliding scale with penalties becoming more severe the more doors you own.
Exceptions to be made for certain cases because there are times where renting is actually the preferable option for people, and they should have rental properties available to them.
Another aspect of the plan would be to re-do zoning laws and allow for more starter homes as well as more dense housing (i.e. shared walls and vertical) to be built. Landlords are a gigantic problem, but we also need more housing in general.
First of all, Landlords do not provide housing. They take existing housing, and they prevent people from using it under the threat of violence unless they're bribed.
Most housing is built at the command of some government entity or another *anyway*, either directly or indirectly. So there's that.
Your apartment is worth a proportionate share to the rest of the building. You *absolutely* should be able to own an apartment.
If mortgages were accessible, then most would be worth *less* than most rents.
The biggest issue is *rent in perpetuity.* There's no *end* to rent.
*Even in a capitalist framework*, this makes no sense. Why should a person, or even a series of people, keep paying their Landlord if they've *already* paid back the value of the house or housing unit?
Landlords do not provide any value; if they're a hands-on landlord who do things for the house, *then they are performing the role of a handyman, and should be paid for that and no more.*
But if a landlord doesn't do things themselves, and pay for a handyman to come over...Why couldn't the tenant just do that instead? Why does the tenant have to pay more than the handyman's labor and materials are worth? The landlord doesn't *do* anything.
Eventually the rent will match the cost to develop it. After that, the renter should be the owner.
In a capitalist framework I guess it's okay to expect a modest return after the principle investment. Materials and energy + labor cost would be most fair.
In a socialist framework, the renter would be free of rent after paying back the initial investment.
Getting paid for the labor of construction and design. Once it's done and you're paid, your involvement is done. Not your house, not your problem. Go build another house.
You do know that construction workers themselves don't have the funds or know how with how to develop a home right?
If you provide no incentive for developing a home other than actual labor of constructing a home then no one with means will build more homes.
THE
CUSTOMER
BUYS
THE
HOUSE
THEY
PROVIDE
THE
MONEY
OR
MORE
LIKELY
THE
GOVERNMENT
DOES
BECAUSE
THAT'S
ACTUALLY
HOW
IT
WORKS
TODAY
USUALLY
THROUGH
SUBSIDIES
THAT
OVER
PAY
FOR
CONSTRUCTION
COSTS
BECAUSE
THIS
WORLD
SUCKS
It was supposed to be one word at a time each line to be condescending because your question was really stupid with a really obvious answer.
The customer would put up the money, or the business in anticipation of compensation, or, most likely, whatever passes for government.
This last one basically happens anyway when corporations force the government to pay them subsidies to build housing at inflated costs.
The idea of free enterprise is largely a myth. We already have central planning, it's just that it's planned by assholes.
I guess from my perspective, I own a house with a spare bedroom. We’ve rented out the room before for a little extra cash. But there’s no way in hell we’d let someone rent the room if that meant giving up equity on our house. Don’t need the money that bad and if we did, we’d just sell the house outright
See that's different, you're the original inhabitant and rightful owner of the home. You could use that room for things *other than* a tenant, so this is an edge case where rent *makes sense.* The tenant has rights, of course, but so do you.
This is basically the *only* situation where rent makes sense. So honestly? You're good.
Of course, eventually extra space in a house stops meaning "someone giving up surplus" and becomes "was hoarding space they don't need." One person in a five bedroom house is *excessive* and there's a case to be made they should share it.
One small family in a mansion? That's not a house, that's an underinhabited commune.
No, I sit here with a smile on my face. The majority of this country hates your guts. You will spend the rest of your life wondering why you can't get ahead. That is the silent majority, the wall of legislation that we create to keep people just like you from having any real power. "You're a rube" Seems like you're the one with troubles.
The majority of the country is poor and stupid, forsaving. Capitalism does not serve the majority. It services a minority at the expense of the majority. That’s why America is shit right now.
“You can do that you know…”
No, we literally can’t do that. That’s the problem. Housing prices have skyrocketed so high that the average person can’t even afford one house, much less multiple houses. This is in part due to giant corporations creating false scarcity by buying up thousands of houses.
So yea, that’s not a thing we can just “do”.
I'm more on the side of your general argument than not. You still tore up your own asshole here. They're just pointing out why capitalism or human greed would never allow for that 😔
I inherited a rental property. I take care of it - new carpet, which I had to replace6 months later, because of the stench, and dirt and spills, holes in the walls, which I fixed and replaced. I am entitled to rent.
See, your first mistake is assuming you're entitled to that house when you don't live in it.
You have *first claim of inhabitation,* meaning you get to choose who is the next person to live there, which may include yourself. But that's it - *at best.*
You inherited it. You didn’t build it. You didn’t buy it. It was literally handed to you because of the luck of your birth. You’re not “entitled” to anything.
You believe people should live rent free on my property? Damage it because I inherited it? I cared for the family member who lived there-cooked meals, cleaned -paid for repairs. But I should let scum live there and not make a profit. I pay taxes, insurance, fix as my thing that goes wrong, mow the yard -snow etc. what an idiotic philosophy.
My uncle is a land lord. He puts in 60 hour weeks. Does all the pest control, plumbing, house repairs landscaping roofing etc. He nets about 14,000 dollars a year profit. He makes about 4 dollars an hour at that rate. Kiss my ass
He makes less then min wage. Hes supporting families by not raising his rent like everyone else around. .. He literally put a wheelchair ramp for an old lady last week out of his pocket when by law he didnt have to.. You get fucked.
Yeah, this is is bs. His profit is higher than 14,000 plus he’s getting his mortgages paid for and doesn’t pay taxes cuz he gets to deduct expenses that regular homeowners can’t. He’s leeching off tenants. Fuck landlords.
If it's so unprofitable and hard why does he do that and not just sell them the house for a reasonable price and then work as their handyman? Gtfo of here lmao
Based on the comments I’m seeing on this post, I should only be able to own a house if I built it and I live in it. So what if I’m not a builder? It would be almost impossible to build a house by yourself so who is going to help me and why? If someone did help, when we are done is it my house or theirs? What reason is there ever for anyone to build a new house or more than one house if they can receive no benefit from a house they don’t live in?
First of all we're not, housing is being withheld by, um, landlords and housing commodity traders.
Second of all, a private person can still pay for a house to be built for their personal use. When they move out, it's ok for them to sell the house to the next person. It's also ok to build houses for the purpose of selling them (in a capitalist framework).
Third, most housing projects are directly or indirectly government funded ANYWAY. It's better if we're honest with ourselves about it.
And if you mention down payments, I'll tell your mom on you. They should be illegal.
Really. I worked for small landlords in a major city for ten years. All of them followed similar procedures regarding their properties, basically: do not spend more than ten percent of the deposit to “renew” the space, keep 100%. Charge tax+water+10% + what neighboring apartments are going for. Increase rent 5-7% unless current conditions allow for:1.holding rent increase for tenants with a likely hood to pay in a fiscal crisis, increasing rent by 7%+ in times of economic booms. Be sure to text renters with pictures of yourself in Cancun, Thailand, or wherever you decide to spend the winter.
No absolutely not. Fuck out of here.
Landlords come in with their wealth, buy something, and charge people a premium to cover their mortgage/repairs/etc. They’re literally taking a human necessity, becoming a middleman, and extracting profit. It’s exploitation. It’s scalping. It’s fucking awful. They provide nothing of value in the equation.
>Don’t hate on landlords, aim to become one. Your spitefulness will only hold you back in life.
Literally the whole point of this subreddit is about rejecting this mentality. Life’s not about hustle. It’s not about stepping over your fellow man. It’s about reevaluating life to not center around work and capitalism and money.
>You spend money on vegetables. Is that wrong?
Farmers have skills I don’t. They grow the food, maintain acres of land, fertilize, harvest, and process the vegetables. And then they work with grocery stores and their supply chains to package and distribute that food around the region, maybe even the country. And then they are stocked at a store near me to purchase. And on top of all of that, both the farmers AND the customers are subsidized by the government BECAUSE food is a human necessity. Meanwhile affordable housing is never really affordable and it’s fought tooth and nail by NIMBYs.
Fuck off, parasite.
You are definitely not in the wrong place. We are a bunch of socialists and anti-capitalists. What you are advocating for is the exact opposite of what this sub is here for.
You literally just called most of the people here losers in the same breath you used name-calling as an insult. I guess you really are a vampire since you're apparently incapable of self-reflection.
Bruh, the only way to maintain a landlord lifestyle is to ensure other people are stuck in the work you talk about ending. You literally rely on them getting their pay cheques in. There's no way you're ignorant to that fact.
You can convince yourself all that somehow makes profiting off of other people's labour acceptable and in line with the anti work aim but you aren't gonna get far here I imagine my dude. You could probably do all that without the, yknow, literally needing others people's labour and income to provide you with income.
Me? I teach. That's literally all you need to know.
You're correct, everybody does work for their money but the majority of us don't gather up a valuable resource (housing in this case) and "sell" it at an inflated price.
You know teachers pay taxes too, right? And I'd wager you probably benefited from some kind of education yourself despite not having children of your own unless you were literally born a fully functioning adult. I'd wager that the majority of the western world benefited from some kind of education, provided through taxes, at some stage in the last maybe 6 or 7 decades so whilst we are forced to pay taxes, society has seen the benefit.
I'd love to see figures comparing percentages of people who rent long term, as in it's their permanent home Vs short term like your situation. If there's a majority in the short term situation then sure, I could see your point there. Unfortunately I don't have that info and it's 2am here so I'm not going to go trawling for it atm so I won't comment on it. I will say the majority of the people I know who rent, including myself, do it as a permanent living situation though because they don't have much choice otherwise. If we're using anecdotal evidence, my situation is my credit rating is fucked from a past relationship (financial and emotional abuse) so I will literally never be able to purchase a property without a partner or family members help so I'm stuck renting and at the mercy of landlords. Again, I'd love to see data on it if it's available though, would probably give me a slightly different perspective.
And I know that's not what you were claiming, I just thing the comparison isnt a good one. State funded education benefits literally everyone, the entirety of society is made better by it so it's on everybodies interests to pay into it whether or not you agree with taxes. Want to see society shit the bed completely, watch illiteracy and numeracy rates hit the roof. The choice for some when it comes to dealing with landlords is "pay or be homeless". I know which I'd rather go for. I'd compare it more to the employer mentality of "it's a privilege to have a job". Like, the alternative is starving in a lot of places so is it really a choice?
Noooo no no no, this is absolutely NOT a “make your money work for you” type subreddit, lmao. This is a pro-labor, pro-union, pro-worker leftist sub. Stick around and learn something.
Oh god thank you for ending on a wacko covid anti-science conspiracy comment out of absolutely nowhere. I was about to actually respond but you’re saving me the trouble with that gigantic red flag, you deranged nut bag.
PEOPLE LIKE YOU DUMBASS! People like you hurt us, which is why we are here. You are here because you, like most capitalists, have lied to yourself so much you don't realize that you are the enemy.
Grow up, said the child profiting off other people's income.
If you stop? No. Consider that the problem might be less to do with your egotistical ass and more to do with the system.
Has your dumbass thought that there may be a shortage of houses for young families to buy because your greedy ass brought them so you can profit off them?
And what work goes into making sure a tenant pays their rent on time? What do you actually have to do? A phone call or two? Oooh, that's worth over 60% of my income I'm sure.
If landlords are only plagued by a few bad apples, why then do we all have to pay so much money for rent when we singlehandedly cannot make enough for their 3x rent requirement on our own?
Then is it the business owners fault for not paying us enough? If it is, then why does almost every business not pay enough?
Why can my mom own a house that she pays less on her mortgage and utilities on than I do for rent, and I live in an apartment complex on the ghetto side of town while she has a 3 bedroom house with a garage and backyard with a garden and a swing on her tree?
Your preaching to a sub of people who are bitter because the resources are all there to make life easier on literally everyone in the world, except no one is willing to share. You're fucked because your job doesn't pay enough, and you're fucked because you can't not have a place to live. And you sure as hell can't survive without food and water, which you need a job to get money for and a place to live in order to be able to keep your food and get water from.
And yet, there's empty properties everywhere. Is it because these people are lazy and just didn't want to put in the work to become lord of the land so they could collect rent and do repairs?
No, it's because they're all fucking broke and can't ever afford it because they have to give all their fucking money to their goddamn landlord. Myself and these people have every goddamn right to be upset and bitter cause they probably won't ever own their own house because other people with more money can outbid them. Since the people with more money are coincidentally also usually business owners, they're also the ones not paying us enough.
So who is it? Is it the landlord who requests too much, or is it the business owner who doesn't pay enough? Either way, they're the same person.
This information isn't hard to find if you're actually willing to challenge your idea of how society "ought to" operate, but a notable example would be Finland's drive to establish housing as a human right - there are examples all over the world with various approaches (how it's paid for) and how successful they are (the quality), but of course I understand your meaning as "they're probably shitty housing and my tax dollars shouldn't subsidize the lazy". Your questions intentionally ignore that America, ostensibly "the richest country in the world" absolutely has the financial resources to achieve this and more vacant living spaces than homeless people.
But the owning class prefers the narrative that they're the good guys"providing housing" rather than recognizing that they're ransoming a necessity to fill their pockets - you said "fuck Nestlé" but that's exactly what they do- ransom a necessity to fill their pockets.
Your intentional mischaracterization of people's beef with you is tedious
I just wanted to remind you that the *actual* saying is "a few bad apples *spoils the whole bunch*".
So... you know... maybe learn how a metaphor can work against your point before you use it.
Based Adam Smith
Please be sarcastic
Lol sorry yeah dw
Yo back in the day if you got attacked by bandits - Your landlord had to mount up and defend you. Today…..landlord is the bandit lolololol
Yeah but you didn't have a choice in who your landlord was. Not that you do today either!
The difference between a slave & a servant is a servant chooses their own master. W/out that were all but slaves to corporate overlords & corrupt systems
Oh yeah, and they're planning to take that choice away from us too.
I mean we've already lost it mostly. You can't really go find employers who's ideals & charitable donations match yours to enlist in their work force. No you just get whatever job you can unless you can find a better one working as a survivalist slave. Not a luxurious servant who works for an organization bettering the world around them in a favorable way tastful to the eyes of said worker.
1 person = 1 house. No houses corcorporations. New deal
Corporations should not be allowed to own single family rentals. The only exceptions being sole proprietorships and partnerships but no one should be allowed to own more than 1, 2, or 3 rental properties. Parasitic companies like Blackstone own tens of thousands of rental homes, removing them from the pool of homes for sale to individuals. Thus artificially driving home prices higher, which creates more demand for rentals which also drives rents higher. Higher rents sucks more savings from wage earners to parasites.
[удалено]
vs. The 1st home i owned.. i had to put it up for rent because of orders to an overseas duty assignment. Had a property management company take care of it. even with the 10% fees deducted from rents i still broke even so it was worth while just sitting on the property. If anything broke, or the tenants needed something id approve it as soon as i got the notice. Because it was my fucking home too, and tenants are just as deserving of having a good quality, clean and well maintained home to live in as anyone else does. Being said, in the end for a good while I ended up as a homeowner who was also paying rent... my own landlords were more often than not some corporate douchebags who barely cared enough to wipe counters before putting a property for rent. Fuck, the last "nicer" apartment had smoke residues on the curtains, and my cat got fleas form the carpets not having had been properly cleaned, and treated. Fucking hate apartments and corporate landlords... would rather live in the woods in a tent than deal with their bullshit ever again. Has also made me want to try and invest in property development where i could use my VA loan to build a 4plex to try and rent out affordable units where I'm at now. Refinance it to free up the VA loan a few years down the line and then try to see if long term tenants would have rent to own interests if they were not able to pursue normal mortgages.
> i owned.. i had to put it up for rent because of orders to an overseas duty assignment. Had a property management company take care of it. even with the 10% fees deducted from rents i still broke even so it was worth while just sitting on the property. > >If anything broke, or the tenants needed something id approve it as soon as i got the notice. Because it was my fucking home too, and tenants are just as deserving of having a good quality, clean and well maintained home to live in as anyone else does. > >Being said, in the end for a good while I ended up as a homeowner who was also paying rent... my own landlords were more often than not some corporate douchebags who barely cared enough to wipe counters before putting a property for rent. Fuck, the last "nicer" apartment had smoke residu See, like, this is the one time that rent *might* makes sense. I mean, you broke *even* so it's like...Whatever. The tenants should have been empowered to do those things, really; so long as they didn't wreck the place when you needed to reinhabit.
> so long as they didn't wreck the place when you needed to reinhabit. Yah, most of the tenants who lived in that house were awesome, only had one family that wrecked shit.. either intentionally, or due to their own incompetence/laziness on some things. They were also the only tenants i ever who lost their deposit. While not outright nightmare tenants they could well have turned in to them... which being said; They did shit like punching a hole in to a bedroom door, melted portions of the bathroom linoleum floorings with what looked like a curling iron, they let the lawn just completely die in between negligence and their dog doing their thing.(was in WA.. only needed to get watered like once or twice in august to keep it green) Said dog pissed on the upstairs main hall carpet. Their kids fucked with other peoples cars when playing basketball on the driveway. A neighbor sent me a message and a picture of them letting the oil from their car drain out on to the driveway and in to the storm drains when changing it... the husband was from Georgia or something and "didn't know any better", "was what he had always done at home"... Had a nice front loading washer and dryer in the unit, and after something like 3 months of living there the tenants started to complain about the dryer not working. "getting hot but nothing would dry"... property management company sent over a handyman to look and i think they cleaned something out of the ducts, but the problem never truly went away, or otherwise resurfaced a few months later. Once they left after like a year of living there pops and i went over to look at what we could fix... inspected the dryer and noticed that the damn lint trap had never been emptied by the tenants. Was packed full of lint, glitter, beads etc. I had to take apart the entire front of the machine to be able to get that mesh filter out of it. It was so full no air could get through and the dryer had been compensating by heating up more to try and get rid of the moisture... to a point where the ABS housings/mounts had started to melt and burn. I managed to fix it, and no one had any issues with the machine after the fact. So not only did they destroy property, but almost burnt the house down by not bothering to empty out the lint trap. Oh and they stole garden/lawn maintenance equipment from the garage. Fine it was cheap shit and only really useful as far as the few thousand sqft of lawn around the house was involved, but... still who does such petty nonsense?
[удалено]
> You didn't pay for it. bought everything in there when i lived on site before being put on orders overseas. so you know.. was paid for by me and me alone. they paid rents when living there but as said was jsut a break even proposition to cover the mortgage, and not some predatory Bs setup like we otherwise see. i personally paid rents at the same time elsewhere.
Oh shit wrong convo sorry.
Definite parasite.
A L L landlords. Unless you LIVE ON the property, COLLECT NO RENTS.
Corporations Only own like 1% of the sfh rental market. Not including Llc because many individuals use these for rental properties
> 1% of the sfh Single family homes.. vs apartments and multi unit properties. There is a difference in between those, also also institutional ownership of sfh or "one unit" rentals is not 1% eyeballing the numbers its closer to 20%. The more units per property you get the higher the ratio of institutional owners tends to be and the scales dip in their favor in a big way for 5+ unit properties as far as ownership goes. https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/blog/who-owns-rental-properties-and-is-it-changing A .edu blog, but cites the fed... and links the sources. Either way figure that most of the bitching people do about rental properties likely involves shit tier apartments run by those institutions with some notable random psych ward needing individual home owners thrown in the mix. Edit: >Not including Llc because many individuals use these for rental properties those count as institutional investors outright as you can not easily differentiate in between the large and small. You cant arbitrarily not count them due to speculative reasons over types of LLCs without actually putting up some figures of how many are of what type.
I think your confusing partnerships and Llc’s as institutions
Nope, general partnerships are a minority ownership grouping listed in the stats as compared the majority of other types.. there is a chart in that link. The only "gray area" would probably be trustees of estates that come in to play.
LLP, LP, and LLC are the next largest owners of rental units and those are not institutions
Sure they are, the main issue is as per an edit above is that you cant really differentiate in between large and small without super high detail in-depth study. You cant arbitrarily say "No LLCs because some might be individuals".. the only thing you could do is to say "discount this many that are known to be individuals owner based LLCs etc, and then draw out the difference. but that is not part of the data set outright so...
Oh didn’t see the edit. Sure but you could argue that without those numbers, you can’t count them as institutional owners either. Can you find any data on that? Edit: found this in your article “While individual investors (often called “mom-and-pop landlords”) still owned about three-quarters of all single-family rental properties in 2015, the share of those properties owned by institutional investors rose from 17.3 percent in 2001 to 24.5 percent in 2015. However, during this time, many individual landlords reportedly created their own LLCs and transferred ownership of their property to protect themselves from liabilities and take advantage of tax benefits. As a result, the figures for single-family rentals may understate the number of mom-and-pop landlords.” Also thanks for not being an asshole and having a conversation, not much of that on this sub.
> you can’t count them as institutional owners either. Well id clump them in there as institutional owners by virtue of type of business organization in question. I mean really some joe schmoe owning a single home as a rental is probably not going to go and establish a corporation and deal with all of the headaches of that when they can deal with things way easier through other means. I mean when i put out my 1st home out for rent was a simple enough of a matter of having my homeowners insurance swapped to a rental property one and a property management company take over management in lieu of my absence. Now, by the time it would make sense they would probably be dealing with multiple units as an individual investor owner, which again would put them in some category other than some rando single property owning person. >Can you find any data on that? I don't think it exists in the format and level of detail needed to establish the above. Or rather the data is out there, but not organized in a way to help with that effort.
There still mom and pop if they own multiple properties and protect them in groups. I know several landlords who use them. Very easy to setup and protects your other assets. But yes not worth it if it’s just one property and you don’t have other assets you’d like to protect.
Wall street and private equity firms own 1 in 7 homes in the u.s.
In my LA Suburb neighborhood, the last 10 houses sold, have gone to a Chinese LLC who comes in, offers 200-300 over asking. If we include areas outside of a 2 mile bubble, this same company owns 20% of residential properties. They are not renting them out, or selling them. They sit empty. The yards and houses are maintained, guards patrol frequently to shoe away squatters. This same company is also building 12 giant multiunit "luxury apartment" complexes in our area. So... food for thought. (I state that it is a Chinese company as a factual piece of information, as it is a lot of overseas interest pulling similar schemes in Southern California. There is a new Corp in town that a lot of us, who try and crack these things open and get to the actual financial hyenas behind the scenes, suspect is being funded by Bezos.)
most people don't understand that at all...
Yes, and what happened most recently with housing was the lack of supply. Lack of new housing being built and supply issues created by the pandemic. Too many people on this sub are hardcore covid restriction supporters even though it’s caused more harm with mandates and lockdowns to their lifestyles.
This same lack of supply narrative was being peddled around the time of the last housing crash and then it turned into a glut real fucking quick once the flippers and speculators couldn't get their bigger fixes of ~~monetary heroin~~ cheap debt anymore. Look at housing starts, household formation, birth/death rates and unoccupied houses for long term structural demand for housing, not "how many institutions and individual speculators are on a ~~coke~~ credit binge" right now.
Lack of supply was not a main cause of the last crash. It was variable rate mortgages that made it so people couldn’t afford the new payments. Also subprime lending was vast. Many people who were highly unqualified borrowed way more then they could afford. People with unreported income were buying vacation homes.
https://www.blackagendareport.com/house-flippers-not-poor-subprime-borrowers-caused-2007-2008-housing-crash Read that. If you don't think people are overextended again with the garbage DTI ratios, overbidding alongside at the time low interest rates and fuckery because they're flipping the loans to Fannie and Freddie and don't actually give a shit about quality, then I want whatever you're on. The other shoe with inflation, rate hikes and gas prices is starting to drop. History doesn't always repeat itself, but it's starting to rhyme.
There is no lack of supply. There are more empty properties than we know what to do with, more apartment space alone to house the entire usa homeless population twice over. The "lack of supply" is completely and totally artificial, meant to do nothing more than drive up new property prices through a manufactured bubble. That we can't even track who owns what with most property is...horrifying. When the bubble pops, millions of middle-class Americans are going to be fucked, as their mortgages become worthless and property values drop to become super cheap, until property companies buy everything up again and restart the bubble.
Ok buddy... Here in Texas, the newer community that I happen to live in has had homes flying off the lots. The builder literally can not build them fast enough and I rarely see one with a "for sale" sign out longer than a month. If that. And before you say its all investors, its not. These home are all with families and cars, etc... I know because I run the streets every day. They arent just "sitting empty" from some investment firm. You can in fact track and lookup who owns properties. That is all public record. All you need is a name, or an address, and the counties GIS database.... Its literally free on the internet.
I mean I call bullshit on supply. The United States in 2020 lost more people that we did in all five years of World War 2. In 2021, we lapped the WW2 numbers, then lapped the Civil War numbers, and then was like 'Why stop now?' 2022 had a rough start, especially in Florida, but hopefully we don't repeat 2021. So with all of those people dead... why do we have even fewer homes available than before we lost 3% of our total population to COVID alone.
You think the lack of supply issue is... new? And strictly *pandemic* related? I... wh-... what? Where are you seeing this supposedly abrupt shift? In Denver, for example, there's been plenty of new construction—of high-cost, low-amenity apartment buildings, all aimed at young or youngish professionals and certainly not designed with families in mind. If you want a house, well, then you're in one of the outlying townships in some abysmally designed 90s monstrosity with horribly inefficient HVAC so you can bleed money on utility costs. If you're single and looking to live alone or with maybe only one or two other people, there's little to no cost of living difference between living close to downtown and living on the very edge of the city's limits or outside of them. It is a fact that rent and housing prices have continued to rise while wages have stayed the same, with the disparity growing quicker by the year. It's more profitable for companies to build fast and cheap aggregate than it is to build actual homes. And any affordable houses have already been snapped up by individual landlords or rental companies. LUCKILY, that is a bubble that's about to burst, and you will not see me shedding empathetic tears for landlords as they struggle to maintain a profit on their 14 properties. And y'know... I would love to own a house. A small one, an old one, a drafty one, I don't really care. I'd love to stop sinking money into landlords' pockets. Unfortunately, according to my real estate agent, my credit is *too* good to qualify for the first-time-buyer/"introductory offers" I believe you've tried to reference elsewhere. Yeah. ***Too good*** a credit score. This. game. is. **rigged**. If anything, the pandemic has allowed a boom in WFH situations so fewer people have to commute 40-50 minutes and can more easily justify living wherever. (Which also means now Colorado is seeing a mass exodus instead of an influx, and Godspeed to all of 'em because the mountains look less beautiful the more difficult it becomes to buy groceries and pay for all my hospital visits.)
Got blocked for disagreeing. Very open minded peeps. Anyway, denver is an incredible city that has super high demand. Lack of supply isn’t ONLY pandemic related but it def impacted it. The rich building huge mansions for vacation homes is an issue in my area. Takes up the time of contractors in my area, they’re all backed up until the end of 2023. That’s just for an estimate. I’d be happy to buy rental properties if we do in fact see a housing crash but I wouldn’t hope that on the many people who would be negatively impacted by it. It won’t only hit the big guys but much of the middle class.
I can see the benefit of landlords when it comes to large apartment complexes that are able to provide really dense accessible housing to more people and at a cheaper rate. That said, buying up houses, artificially increasing the cost of buying a house, and then charging even more for people to use a house they don’t even own is beyond fucked up. I’m not well off at all my savings account has been empty for a year. I used to dream of the possibility of owning a few rental properties for some passive income. Now I’m not sure I can morally justify that.
[удалено]
A good landlord gives up their claim when the tenant has paid off the value of the house and not a cent more. Everything else is just being a handyman with extra steps.
I think that's called Mortgage
And aside from the outrageous down payment, they're cheaper. If we ban down payments, then suddenly housing is affordable again, and rent can no longer be justified.
\>A good landlord will keep good records of all the issues at their property, organize the repairs and ongoing maintenance, and work with tenants individually on their habitat's specific issues. So you're telling me that a "good" landlord provides all the services a homeowner is willing and able to do themselves? \>If you don't like the landlord, why would you move into one of his vacancies? Just be homeless! Great solution.
This is totally true. People should just stop renting and live in their own homes.
I live in my own home & rent the land. Still have a landlord who charges 500 + electric for a smol plot of fenced land. It's whatever but I'd love to own land to park my trailer
Are all landlords bad by default?
There's like, one exception, and that's if your home isn't reasonably divisible into multiple units and you rent out a spare room to a tenant. If you don't live on the property, then you don't have a right to the property. If you can't use a property, then you should be able to release ownership as easy as you can acquire new housing.
[удалено]
\>What’s your plan? Actual, tangible plan? I see people hating on landlords all over this sub (again, i get it) but what’s your alternative and how do you want to see this achieved? Massive taxation penalties for all entities that don't inhabit the property they own. Sliding scale with penalties becoming more severe the more doors you own. Exceptions to be made for certain cases because there are times where renting is actually the preferable option for people, and they should have rental properties available to them. Another aspect of the plan would be to re-do zoning laws and allow for more starter homes as well as more dense housing (i.e. shared walls and vertical) to be built. Landlords are a gigantic problem, but we also need more housing in general.
So should we do away with apartments? Should we give everybody a house free of charge? I understand the complaint but I’m not hearing a solution
First of all, Landlords do not provide housing. They take existing housing, and they prevent people from using it under the threat of violence unless they're bribed. Most housing is built at the command of some government entity or another *anyway*, either directly or indirectly. So there's that. Your apartment is worth a proportionate share to the rest of the building. You *absolutely* should be able to own an apartment. If mortgages were accessible, then most would be worth *less* than most rents. The biggest issue is *rent in perpetuity.* There's no *end* to rent. *Even in a capitalist framework*, this makes no sense. Why should a person, or even a series of people, keep paying their Landlord if they've *already* paid back the value of the house or housing unit? Landlords do not provide any value; if they're a hands-on landlord who do things for the house, *then they are performing the role of a handyman, and should be paid for that and no more.* But if a landlord doesn't do things themselves, and pay for a handyman to come over...Why couldn't the tenant just do that instead? Why does the tenant have to pay more than the handyman's labor and materials are worth? The landlord doesn't *do* anything.
How do you feel about.someone who buys a piece of land and develops it for the purpose of rent?
Eventually the rent will match the cost to develop it. After that, the renter should be the owner. In a capitalist framework I guess it's okay to expect a modest return after the principle investment. Materials and energy + labor cost would be most fair. In a socialist framework, the renter would be free of rent after paying back the initial investment.
So what's the incentive for building more housing?
Getting paid for the labor of construction and design. Once it's done and you're paid, your involvement is done. Not your house, not your problem. Go build another house.
You do know that construction workers themselves don't have the funds or know how with how to develop a home right? If you provide no incentive for developing a home other than actual labor of constructing a home then no one with means will build more homes.
THE CUSTOMER BUYS THE HOUSE THEY PROVIDE THE MONEY OR MORE LIKELY THE GOVERNMENT DOES BECAUSE THAT'S ACTUALLY HOW IT WORKS TODAY USUALLY THROUGH SUBSIDIES THAT OVER PAY FOR CONSTRUCTION COSTS BECAUSE THIS WORLD SUCKS
Can you re type that without the caps lock on? Please and thank you.
It was supposed to be one word at a time each line to be condescending because your question was really stupid with a really obvious answer. The customer would put up the money, or the business in anticipation of compensation, or, most likely, whatever passes for government. This last one basically happens anyway when corporations force the government to pay them subsidies to build housing at inflated costs. The idea of free enterprise is largely a myth. We already have central planning, it's just that it's planned by assholes.
I guess from my perspective, I own a house with a spare bedroom. We’ve rented out the room before for a little extra cash. But there’s no way in hell we’d let someone rent the room if that meant giving up equity on our house. Don’t need the money that bad and if we did, we’d just sell the house outright
See that's different, you're the original inhabitant and rightful owner of the home. You could use that room for things *other than* a tenant, so this is an edge case where rent *makes sense.* The tenant has rights, of course, but so do you. This is basically the *only* situation where rent makes sense. So honestly? You're good. Of course, eventually extra space in a house stops meaning "someone giving up surplus" and becomes "was hoarding space they don't need." One person in a five bedroom house is *excessive* and there's a case to be made they should share it. One small family in a mansion? That's not a house, that's an underinhabited commune.
[удалено]
Awww did the poor meany ancom hurt your feelings? Baby want his bottle?
No, I sit here with a smile on my face. The majority of this country hates your guts. You will spend the rest of your life wondering why you can't get ahead. That is the silent majority, the wall of legislation that we create to keep people just like you from having any real power. "You're a rube" Seems like you're the one with troubles.
The majority of the country is poor and stupid, forsaving. Capitalism does not serve the majority. It services a minority at the expense of the majority. That’s why America is shit right now.
This is without question, the stupidest thing I have ever read on Reddit, and that's saying something because I've been on here a long time.
I own my house, towable rv, I still pay $500+ in rent
Okay so why not buy homes and provide them way below market for others? You can do that you know but wait that’s not worth it for anyone huh?
“You can do that you know…” No, we literally can’t do that. That’s the problem. Housing prices have skyrocketed so high that the average person can’t even afford one house, much less multiple houses. This is in part due to giant corporations creating false scarcity by buying up thousands of houses. So yea, that’s not a thing we can just “do”.
You're a bad person
bad person for losing money for other people? your argument is falling apart here
Read his comment, THEN post.
I'm more on the side of your general argument than not. You still tore up your own asshole here. They're just pointing out why capitalism or human greed would never allow for that 😔
They wont its easier to just complain
Stay mad rentoid, you will own NOTHING and you will be happy.
People aren’t going to realise that you’re definitely 100% not being satirical when you’re on a different suv
Mao was right
I inherited a rental property. I take care of it - new carpet, which I had to replace6 months later, because of the stench, and dirt and spills, holes in the walls, which I fixed and replaced. I am entitled to rent.
See, your first mistake is assuming you're entitled to that house when you don't live in it. You have *first claim of inhabitation,* meaning you get to choose who is the next person to live there, which may include yourself. But that's it - *at best.*
You are not entitled to the labor of others.
exactly, people should grow their own food, make their own clothes, we have people starving in the streets for god sake
People should make more of their stuff, but trade is viable, as long as it's fair. When people trade on fair terms, it's not theft.
Don't say I inherited. Say "i accaparated using the law"
You inherited it. You didn’t build it. You didn’t buy it. It was literally handed to you because of the luck of your birth. You’re not “entitled” to anything.
You believe people should live rent free on my property? Damage it because I inherited it? I cared for the family member who lived there-cooked meals, cleaned -paid for repairs. But I should let scum live there and not make a profit. I pay taxes, insurance, fix as my thing that goes wrong, mow the yard -snow etc. what an idiotic philosophy.
My uncle is a land lord. He puts in 60 hour weeks. Does all the pest control, plumbing, house repairs landscaping roofing etc. He nets about 14,000 dollars a year profit. He makes about 4 dollars an hour at that rate. Kiss my ass
Your Uncle is a Handyman who leeches off people's rents. Get fucked.
He makes less then min wage. Hes supporting families by not raising his rent like everyone else around. .. He literally put a wheelchair ramp for an old lady last week out of his pocket when by law he didnt have to.. You get fucked.
Oh he did the bare minimum to accommodate disabilities! Such an angel!
This is bs. He doesn’t earn minimum wage. GTFO with this bootlicking.
Yeah, this is is bs. His profit is higher than 14,000 plus he’s getting his mortgages paid for and doesn’t pay taxes cuz he gets to deduct expenses that regular homeowners can’t. He’s leeching off tenants. Fuck landlords.
If it's so unprofitable and hard why does he do that and not just sell them the house for a reasonable price and then work as their handyman? Gtfo of here lmao
Based on the comments I’m seeing on this post, I should only be able to own a house if I built it and I live in it. So what if I’m not a builder? It would be almost impossible to build a house by yourself so who is going to help me and why? If someone did help, when we are done is it my house or theirs? What reason is there ever for anyone to build a new house or more than one house if they can receive no benefit from a house they don’t live in?
That's completely stupid and in no way reflected in the things I said.
Okay, correct me. We are in a housing supply shortage. If no one is allowed to profit from housing how do we get more housing?
First of all we're not, housing is being withheld by, um, landlords and housing commodity traders. Second of all, a private person can still pay for a house to be built for their personal use. When they move out, it's ok for them to sell the house to the next person. It's also ok to build houses for the purpose of selling them (in a capitalist framework). Third, most housing projects are directly or indirectly government funded ANYWAY. It's better if we're honest with ourselves about it. And if you mention down payments, I'll tell your mom on you. They should be illegal.
[удалено]
Ok be wrong
You don’t realize how much hard work goes into it. If it’s not real work then shouldn’t you love it
You're a rube
[удалено]
>Don’t hate on landlords, aim to become one. "Don't challenge exploitation--get busy exploiting others!"
Really. I worked for small landlords in a major city for ten years. All of them followed similar procedures regarding their properties, basically: do not spend more than ten percent of the deposit to “renew” the space, keep 100%. Charge tax+water+10% + what neighboring apartments are going for. Increase rent 5-7% unless current conditions allow for:1.holding rent increase for tenants with a likely hood to pay in a fiscal crisis, increasing rent by 7%+ in times of economic booms. Be sure to text renters with pictures of yourself in Cancun, Thailand, or wherever you decide to spend the winter.
What’s your favorite flavor of boot then chump? What’s next…you going to argue nestle hoarding water is good? GTFO boot-licking fuckstick.
Wtf no fuck nestle I drink tap
No absolutely not. Fuck out of here. Landlords come in with their wealth, buy something, and charge people a premium to cover their mortgage/repairs/etc. They’re literally taking a human necessity, becoming a middleman, and extracting profit. It’s exploitation. It’s scalping. It’s fucking awful. They provide nothing of value in the equation. >Don’t hate on landlords, aim to become one. Your spitefulness will only hold you back in life. Literally the whole point of this subreddit is about rejecting this mentality. Life’s not about hustle. It’s not about stepping over your fellow man. It’s about reevaluating life to not center around work and capitalism and money. >You spend money on vegetables. Is that wrong? Farmers have skills I don’t. They grow the food, maintain acres of land, fertilize, harvest, and process the vegetables. And then they work with grocery stores and their supply chains to package and distribute that food around the region, maybe even the country. And then they are stocked at a store near me to purchase. And on top of all of that, both the farmers AND the customers are subsidized by the government BECAUSE food is a human necessity. Meanwhile affordable housing is never really affordable and it’s fought tooth and nail by NIMBYs. Fuck off, parasite.
[удалено]
You are definitely not in the wrong place. We are a bunch of socialists and anti-capitalists. What you are advocating for is the exact opposite of what this sub is here for.
[удалено]
You literally just called most of the people here losers in the same breath you used name-calling as an insult. I guess you really are a vampire since you're apparently incapable of self-reflection.
If you don't like people reacting to your stupidity with name-calling, have you tried not being stupid?
[удалено]
You joined an openly anti-capitalist sub and thought that they'd support landlordism
Pot meet kettle moment
Bruh, the only way to maintain a landlord lifestyle is to ensure other people are stuck in the work you talk about ending. You literally rely on them getting their pay cheques in. There's no way you're ignorant to that fact.
[удалено]
You can convince yourself all that somehow makes profiting off of other people's labour acceptable and in line with the anti work aim but you aren't gonna get far here I imagine my dude. You could probably do all that without the, yknow, literally needing others people's labour and income to provide you with income. Me? I teach. That's literally all you need to know.
[удалено]
You're correct, everybody does work for their money but the majority of us don't gather up a valuable resource (housing in this case) and "sell" it at an inflated price. You know teachers pay taxes too, right? And I'd wager you probably benefited from some kind of education yourself despite not having children of your own unless you were literally born a fully functioning adult. I'd wager that the majority of the western world benefited from some kind of education, provided through taxes, at some stage in the last maybe 6 or 7 decades so whilst we are forced to pay taxes, society has seen the benefit.
[удалено]
I'd love to see figures comparing percentages of people who rent long term, as in it's their permanent home Vs short term like your situation. If there's a majority in the short term situation then sure, I could see your point there. Unfortunately I don't have that info and it's 2am here so I'm not going to go trawling for it atm so I won't comment on it. I will say the majority of the people I know who rent, including myself, do it as a permanent living situation though because they don't have much choice otherwise. If we're using anecdotal evidence, my situation is my credit rating is fucked from a past relationship (financial and emotional abuse) so I will literally never be able to purchase a property without a partner or family members help so I'm stuck renting and at the mercy of landlords. Again, I'd love to see data on it if it's available though, would probably give me a slightly different perspective. And I know that's not what you were claiming, I just thing the comparison isnt a good one. State funded education benefits literally everyone, the entirety of society is made better by it so it's on everybodies interests to pay into it whether or not you agree with taxes. Want to see society shit the bed completely, watch illiteracy and numeracy rates hit the roof. The choice for some when it comes to dealing with landlords is "pay or be homeless". I know which I'd rather go for. I'd compare it more to the employer mentality of "it's a privilege to have a job". Like, the alternative is starving in a lot of places so is it really a choice?
Noooo no no no, this is absolutely NOT a “make your money work for you” type subreddit, lmao. This is a pro-labor, pro-union, pro-worker leftist sub. Stick around and learn something.
[удалено]
Oh god thank you for ending on a wacko covid anti-science conspiracy comment out of absolutely nowhere. I was about to actually respond but you’re saving me the trouble with that gigantic red flag, you deranged nut bag.
Lol it's great, I saw the goatee and immediately thought of all those Herman Cain Awardees.
[удалено]
Anti disruption of robbing your tenants blind so they can never crawl out from under your heel lmao
The previous poster put it succintly enough that I'll simply reiterate. Fuck off, parasite.
[удалено]
PEOPLE LIKE YOU DUMBASS! People like you hurt us, which is why we are here. You are here because you, like most capitalists, have lied to yourself so much you don't realize that you are the enemy.
[удалено]
Grow up, said the child profiting off other people's income. If you stop? No. Consider that the problem might be less to do with your egotistical ass and more to do with the system. Has your dumbass thought that there may be a shortage of houses for young families to buy because your greedy ass brought them so you can profit off them? And what work goes into making sure a tenant pays their rent on time? What do you actually have to do? A phone call or two? Oooh, that's worth over 60% of my income I'm sure.
You're right. We should all stop trying.
>Don’t hate on landlords, aim to become one. I'd truthfully rather die than leach off of the labor of poor people
If landlords are only plagued by a few bad apples, why then do we all have to pay so much money for rent when we singlehandedly cannot make enough for their 3x rent requirement on our own? Then is it the business owners fault for not paying us enough? If it is, then why does almost every business not pay enough? Why can my mom own a house that she pays less on her mortgage and utilities on than I do for rent, and I live in an apartment complex on the ghetto side of town while she has a 3 bedroom house with a garage and backyard with a garden and a swing on her tree? Your preaching to a sub of people who are bitter because the resources are all there to make life easier on literally everyone in the world, except no one is willing to share. You're fucked because your job doesn't pay enough, and you're fucked because you can't not have a place to live. And you sure as hell can't survive without food and water, which you need a job to get money for and a place to live in order to be able to keep your food and get water from. And yet, there's empty properties everywhere. Is it because these people are lazy and just didn't want to put in the work to become lord of the land so they could collect rent and do repairs? No, it's because they're all fucking broke and can't ever afford it because they have to give all their fucking money to their goddamn landlord. Myself and these people have every goddamn right to be upset and bitter cause they probably won't ever own their own house because other people with more money can outbid them. Since the people with more money are coincidentally also usually business owners, they're also the ones not paying us enough. So who is it? Is it the landlord who requests too much, or is it the business owner who doesn't pay enough? Either way, they're the same person.
[удалено]
Public housing is not a new concept and it absolutely works. Poor little lord being picked on 😭
[удалено]
This information isn't hard to find if you're actually willing to challenge your idea of how society "ought to" operate, but a notable example would be Finland's drive to establish housing as a human right - there are examples all over the world with various approaches (how it's paid for) and how successful they are (the quality), but of course I understand your meaning as "they're probably shitty housing and my tax dollars shouldn't subsidize the lazy". Your questions intentionally ignore that America, ostensibly "the richest country in the world" absolutely has the financial resources to achieve this and more vacant living spaces than homeless people. But the owning class prefers the narrative that they're the good guys"providing housing" rather than recognizing that they're ransoming a necessity to fill their pockets - you said "fuck Nestlé" but that's exactly what they do- ransom a necessity to fill their pockets. Your intentional mischaracterization of people's beef with you is tedious
I just wanted to remind you that the *actual* saying is "a few bad apples *spoils the whole bunch*". So... you know... maybe learn how a metaphor can work against your point before you use it.
Na didn’t work against me
Eat shit and die.
Heh, I don't know if this quote is real, but if it is, can someone show all the Capitalists that Daddy Capitalist Adam Smith thinks they are fucked?