• TrickDacy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    93
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Paying a bank hundreds of thousands of dollars in interest is also robbery. what did the bank do? Were rich and did paperwork. Wow so irreplaceable and valuable. Think of all the poor people they swindled to get there! Amazing 😍

  • Catsrules@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    But Isn’t that how all business works?

    Customers pay for things and that payment pays to keep the business going.

    • ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The business in this case being what? What good or service is being provided? Landlords didn’t create the land, nor did they build the residence, nor did they improve its value by building a community around it. They are benefiting off of the work of others simply because they “own” it. The most common arguments I hear in support of landlords are:

      1. Landlords take care of maintenance. Maintenance costs don’t increase 20% a year. If rent was simply maintenance costs it would be a fraction of what it currently is
      2. Landlords allow people who cannot afford a home a place to stay. Why do you think they can’t afford a home? It’s like saying without scalpers people wouldn’t be able to see concerts because the tickets are instantly purchased by bots.
      • Catsrules@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The two big main ones I can think of.

        They provide short term housing. If your only planning to say 1-2 years in a location it often doesn’t make much sense to buy a house.

        They also take on all of risk of the property.

        Obviously I am not saying landlords are the greatest thing in the world but they do serve a purpose.

        • benignintervention@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          Two years ago I became a first time homeowner. I’m moving in 6 months and am going to keep this property and rent it out. I cannot afford to buy another house almost anywhere in the US. I will be renting. However, I closed on this place with 3% interest and pay $1500/mo for the mortgage, plus about $250 for utilities. Round up to $1800/mo. Anyone buying at today’s interest and value with 20% down is looking at a mortgage of about $2300/mo, before utilities.

          I absolutely resent this market, but I refuse to let this place go into the hands of anyone like Blackrock. And since I don’t care about maximizing profit, I can keep the rate on the lower end and help someone live here for a few hundred a month less than they could with a new sale. I can rent it for $1700-1800/mo to cover incidentals and repair and still let a renter live here for less than a new mortgage.

          I’ve been toying with the idea of counting every dollar the renter pays against the mortgage and selling to them at the difference when (if) rates come back down.

          Certainly not ideal, and a little bit apologetic, but in this situation it’s about as close as I can get to a win-win. Or least lost-least lost.

          • Saurok@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You could always sell it at a low enough price to break even and just refuse to sell it to anyone besides someone who plans on actually living in it. You’re allowed to do that. Real estate agent might look at you like you’re crazy, but fuck em. It’s your house right now.

      • ashok36@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Some people don’t want to be locked down to one place for long. When I was in my twenties I moved to a different town every year when my lease was up just to see if I would like it better somewhere else. Or I’d get a raise and be able to afford a better place the next year. For people that want relatively short term housing, renting is a far superior option.

        If I took out a mortgage on a place and then sold it a year later, I’d have almost no equity since you pay almost all interest in the front part of the loan.

        • Gabu@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          They shouldn’t buy the house to begin with, how are you having trouble following such a simple argument?

            • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              First of all: “Just asking questions” is not an argument. It’s disingenuous at best and done by people who have a strong opinion on a subject but can’t articulate why. They feel they are correct and think they are cleverly avoiding having to actually defend their stance by never actually stating what it is.

              And why shouldn’t they buy the house?

              Because the necessities of survival shouldn’t be a source of profit. Companies shouldn’t be allowed to purchase all the air or water and force you to buy it from them for inflated prices because “what else are you going to do?” In the same why they shouldn’t be allowed to buy all the property and force you to rent from them because “where else are you going to stay?”

              What’s the limit on houses?

              That’s exactly the problem. There should be a limit on houses, and we’re seeing the consequences of a limit not existing. People are calling for a limit to exist.

              Personally I think it should be illegal to rent out a property you don’t live on, and any property you own beyond the first should be taxed at a much higher rate.

              • Professorozone@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                So let me relate my story.

                At the age of 18 I got my first job working my way through college pushing 1200 packages an hour in a UPS warehouse. Back then $20 was a lot of money to me. That would fill my gas tank for a week. But I pulled that out of every paycheck and I continued doing that from every paycheck I got after college and beyond, increasing it to 30% of my professional income over time.

                After 30 years of working to make someone else rich I looked at my now substantial investments, both personal and 401k and realized, Holy crap, these are just numbers in a computer. What would I actually do if I looked at those investments and one day the number was zero? I mean, in one form or another they were really all just stocks. If the market crashed I could lose a lot and have to build back up. What if the bank collapsed? Theoretically, government insurance might cover me, but I don’t know what the fine print says. What if I didn’t qualify for some reason? Even if I did, how long would it take? What if I was hacked and from the bank’s perspective, I had simply withdrawn the money?

                My answer was to diversify. If I bought a house and everything turned to shit, at least I could LIVE in the house. So me and a buddy each put in $50k to buy a gutted house near the beach. Then we foolishly spent 3 years of our lives working nights and weekends, putting in a kitchen, floors, paint, doors, plumbing, tearing out walls to fix termite damage. We paid to have the wiring brought up to code. We made it nice and spent $68k.

                We got a great renter in there for market price and then Covid hit. I talked to my partner and we decided that if she couldn’t pay, she was going to stay rent free. Fortunately, she never missed a payment but it didn’t feel right to raise the rent and price her out of the house. Rents in the area are $2500/ month. She’s paying $1900/ month. If you do the math you know we are essentially giving up $600/ month of potential income.

                Now let’s see how I’m stealing this income. Last year was just great. A tornado hit the neighborhood and damaged the roof, the fence, some of the exterior and left debris, like someone’s front door, in the yard that had to be hauled away. Total cost including the roof $13k. We got lucky.

                So, $1900 rent x 12 months is $22800/ year. Subtract $13k plus $3600 for property taxes, plus $300 for inside pest control, plus $300 for termite treatment plus $600 for incidental things that needed fixing. That’s $5k. Divide that by 2 because I only own half and I raked in a whopping $2500, on which i get to pay income taxes. Let’s not forget the time it takes to contact 3 roofers to get quotes, meet them to pick colors and sign the contract, clean up the yard, write up the lease and bring it to her to sign, arrange for any and all repairs or emergencies and the myriad of other things that crop up over the years.

                And now that I’ve found out how I’ve been robbing my renter by just sitting around collecting money I don’t deserve, I have to call my buddy and tell him we have to sell the house for zero profit and of course, kick the renter out so she can… I don’t know… spend $600/ month more finding another place to live.

                Like I said, I don’t make these rules. I paid rent too and now a mortgage. Would I like to live in a country that didn’t allow corporations to buy up everything and jack up the price of those living there? Hell yeah.

                So I vote. What else can I do? I didn’t crush anyone under my heels to get what i have. I literally saved the money i made. And if I want to protect everything I’ve spent my whole life to create I can put it in… what… diamonds? Like those don’t have blood on them. Make my own business. Isn’t that like joining the enemy. I mean the goal would be to grow, right? Boats, cars? What is socially acceptable?

                I’m sorry but I’m just not this horrible robber depicted in the meme and I’m not apologizing.

                • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Housing shouldn’t be an investment.

                  “I bought a limited resource people require for survival, what should I have done?”

                  Not do that. I have plenty of investments, none of them are houses. This feigned ignorance of “what else am I allowed to invest in?” Doesn’t work. Go talk to an advisor, they’ll provide you with plenty of options.

              • Professorozone@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                First of all, maybe I’m not trying to argue, maybe I’m asking questions because I want to understand the other person’s side and making sure that person has fully thought through his position. How can I agree or disagree if I don’t even know the rules. On this topic people seem to be pretty certain that ALL landlords are basically stealing a living from their renters. I don’t care for arguments that place individuals in the same category as large corporations. There are heroes and villains in every industry. Landlording is no exception.

                I did not set up the rules, I’m just following them. In the united states this is unfortunately how it functions.

                • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  First of all, people are able to state their opinions on a subject without first having to ask questions like:

                  So they should buy the house, pay the mortgage and let you stay there for free?

                  This is exactly what I mean by “just asking questions” being disingenuous at best. That’s not a questions someone asks a person if they are legitimately “wanting to understand the other person’s side”.

                  How can I agree or disagree if I don’t even know the rules

                  What rules? They made pretty clear statements about their position (unlike you). You can ask them clarifying questions and state your own position on the subject at the same time.

                  I don’t care for arguments that place individuals in the same category as large corporations.

                  It’s possible for something to be wrong for both individuals and corporations to take part in. If someone is saying “slavery is bad” I don’t need to hear some bullshit “Corporations who use slave labour are worse than individuals who use slave labour. Leave the individuals alone!” Both are bad. Corporations are worse, yes, but that doesn’t give individuals a free pass. Both need to be stopped.

                  There are heroes and villains in every industry.

                  Yes, and the role of government should be to step in and stop the villains.

                  I did not set up the rules, I’m just following them. In the united states this is unfortunately how it functions.

                  That is exactly the point. This is how it functions and it shouldn’t be. That doesn’t change by people shrugging their shoulders and saying “it is what it is.” It changes by people making noise about it until the rules are changed.

              • Professorozone@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                1 year ago

                Well I’d say you’re really not very polite and that you didn’t answer my question.

                Why don’t you educate me since you’re so smart. Are you saying the only people who should own a house are those who are going to live in it?

                • Gabu@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  10
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I’m saying “owning” land shouldn’t be a viable way to acquire profit. It’s a really basic statement, and it’s not a new idea either.

                • beansbeansbeans@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  You do come off as a bit obtuse, and I think that what Gabu is trying to say is that only people should own residential property, not banks/hedge funds/corporations/etc. People should own their residence, and it shouldn’t cost half their income. Renting can be beneficial, but it shouldn’t cost as much as getting your own mortgage.

                  A cap on how many properties each person can own would help; no one needs more than a few properties. If residences aren’t treated like an investment, prices would be more reasonable, and the barrier to entry lower. Then you could actually move place-to-place every 3 years, sell, and not get robbed by realtors who don’t deserve the huge commissions they get on the already over-inflated housing prices.

                  Did you know that in some places, a seller’s agent won’t even talk to you unless you have a buyer’s agent?

                  Anyway, small landlords aren’t really the problem. It’s the big boys who own whole buildings and neighborhoods, driving up prices just because they can. Stricter regulations need to be put into place to make those firms go back to gambling over their shitty stocks and not the roofs over our heads.

  • exterstellar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Is this post saying that if the landlord CAN afford the house without you paying rent, then it’s justified, and in that case they ARE providing you housing?

    • doctorcrimson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yeah I had the same thought, this post doesn’t make a very good anti-landlord argument if in the case the renters stop paying, then both they and the landlord lose their homes.

    • HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      In the same way GPU and game console scalpers were generously, out of the goodness of their heart providing GPUs and game consoles to the masses.

  • superweeniehutjrs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    Although I agree with the sentiment - I am curious how the system works with landlords having so many unoccupied units in some cities. Especially business/commercial/industrial landlords. It keeps rent artificially high, while reducing some types of overhead I would guess.

    • PlasterAnalyst@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      Speculation. Some investors are more interested in holding the property until they can sell it in the future for a profit, rather than the rent they would earn now. Some landlords will have negative cashflow even if they are charging rent because they know they can sell the property for a profit later.

      • superweeniehutjrs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        How does the business of being a landlord not work out to a “yes and” solution? You could make money on rent and sell at a later date. Is risk too high due to the cost of proper upkeep when a unit is occupied? Is it the cost of management?

        • IMongoose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          My family has a few houses they rent out. Not nearly enough income to live off of as they all have other jobs, but it’s some. As a rule, an empty apartment is better than a bad tenant. Not only will a bad tenant not pay and take months to remove, they will actively destroy the place causing thousands in damages. “Just sue them” someone may say. Well, they don’t have any money for rent, they surely don’t have 10 months of rent + $4k in repair + legal fees. Sure, we can garnish their wages. What’s 5% of $0 in reported income per month?

          Yes, some landlords deserve the hate they get but let’s not pretend everyone is the perfect tenant either. The people of Walmart need to live somewhere.

        • bunkyprewster@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think that a lower price for the rent translates into a lower valuation of the property. So an empty apartment at $2000 a month is still theoretically worth more at sale than a rented apartment at $1500

      • tok@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        housing are people to live in. shouldn’t be used for speculation. a landlord in my building owns like 7 or 8 apartments. insanely hight rent prices. this should be fucking ilegal. greed destroying society

  • BlanketsWithSmallpox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Rent is robbery… But your landlord is poorer than you? What?

    People with diverse skills or able to remote work, move to the Midwest and rural mountain states. Swing them blue and get all the mcmansions you want.

      • BlanketsWithSmallpox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        So your building mechanic, accountant, and one liable in case anything goes wrong who is just as poor and destitute as him huh?

        Doesn’t sound like a landlord problem does it?

    • Grayox@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      No one said that landlord’s are poor, landlord’s quite literally leech off of their tenants pay checks, making them even richer than they were to start, without lifting a finger, or contributing anything to society.

      • BlanketsWithSmallpox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        It sure sounds like the cases you’re talking about are landlords who are building mechanics, accountants, and living just as paycheck to paycheck trying to stay afloat just like all of you.

          • BlanketsWithSmallpox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Sounds like a rich people laughing at poors fighting each other problem to me.

            But yeah, keep blaming your neighbor and the one who you literally have to work with to live in your overpriced city. That’ll really change things this time you fake ass propaganda pushing gullible sap.

            • 1nk@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Dude, you’re name is joking about native American genocide, stfu

                • MonkRome@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  The British repeatedly gave blankets they new had smallpox. Todays evidence is that nothing happened, the virus was already dead. But it’s worth mentioning that from a Native American perspective this still happened, they received blankets and shortly after they had an epidemic. Whether they contracted it from the blankets or not is sort of besides they point, they intended to infect Native Americans with smallpox and local tribes ended up having a smallpox epidemic shortly after. Maybe they found another way, or maybe someone got infected by coming in contact with the British during one of the conflicts. But does it really matter? With or without blankets they still murdered millions (thought to be the largest genocide in human history) of native people on their own land simply because they wanted to steal all the land. They didn’t need smallpox to do that, they did it with guns, and forced starvation.

    • letsgo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well in theory it makes you more mobile (if you want/need to move for some reason): just give your landlord notice and move out. Whereas selling can take an indefinite amount of time.

      • JargonWagon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, not to mention the responsibilities that a landlord has when it comes to maintenance on the property. I was saying no one else in this thread gets that there are benefits to renting, even though there are.

  • fosforus@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    This is called a risk investment. The risk is that nobody rents the place, in which case the landlord would lose the property.

    As a renter, you have the freedom to call out that bet, but it’s quite probable that somebody else will rent instead of you. Also, if the markets are efficient, it’s almost 100% that you’re not getting a better deal anywhere else for your place of residence.