"How do you feel about this?"
"Oh it's tough"
lol that cop doesn't give a shit
Probably upset it's not done on weekends on overtime.
"How do you feel about this?"
"Oh it's tough"
lol that cop doesn't give a shit
you got receipts that landlords are the ones causing housing prices to go up?Imma be extremely clear now
Trying to make extra money by driving up housing prices and squeezing renters, which are generally low income, IS being a dick
While it is absolutely true that there's no ethical consumption, much less investment, in capitalism, mortgaging to rent is one of the most socially harmful actions you can take with your capital
you got receipts that landlords are the ones causing housing prices to go up?
also renting a house is one of the absolute best ways to free yourself with positive cash flow and not being a slave to the man until your dead.
Demand for limited-quantity stuff (well-located land in this case) makes price for stuff go upyou got receipts that landlords are the ones causing housing prices to go up?
No shit, you just became the man.also renting a house is one of the absolute best ways to free yourself with positive cash flow and not being a slave to the man until your dead.
Did I say they were limitless? No, I didn't, but you sure as hell built a strawman out of something I didn't say. Er...maybe we should try and prevent the exploitation of people? WtfWhat are the limits of this human right? Just because you invoke rights, doesn't mean they are limitless. The other side of the coin is that people can just take whatever housing they want and invoke their right to it and that's clearly idiotic so what are the limits?
Also, all industries exploit some basic human right at some point. That's why people do industry, so your latest line is just a platitude.
Yes. There are loads of articles pointing to housing developers sitting on landbanks that could be used for much needed housing until the area's rental prices improved and demographics changed (See: Brown people kicked out and white people move in).
housing developer has nothing to do with landlord. So lets just clear that right up.Demand for limited-quantity stuff (well-located land in this case) makes price for stuff go up
This is really basic fact of economics
So you make more money and then like 91% of Americans by doing a job most Americans can't do and you consider yourself a regular person?i make over 6 figures. And i actually don't own a single rent house. In fact when we refinanced earlier this year the bank made us sign an affidavit that we don't own our previous home even though we sold it over 3 years ago when we moved out.
my wife and I buy mobile homes and owner finance them to people who cannot get loans through a bank or the mobile home dealer either because of credit, ridiculous interest rates or they're afraid because they are "illegal" immigrants or whatever.
we had one couple who one lost her job after the pandemic and her husband was out of work before the pandemic because he had a heart attack. We simply told them not to worry about it and just to start paying back on their loan when they can, no balloon payment or deferred payments or whatever.
so why not vilify the banks too? because evictions are the first round, foreclosures are coming too. How about home builders for charging to build homes? The electric company for charging for electricity? where does the vilification end?
Housing is two goods:housing developer has nothing to do with landlord. So lets just clear that right up.
housing developer has nothing to do with landlord. So lets just clear that right up.
Jesus Christ. This entire whiny post just reeks of landlord/small business tyrant entitlement.
Landlords didn't build the property. They didn't install the electrical panels. They didn't pour the concrete slab. They don't directly maintain the building. The only thing landlords actually do is maintain and profit off of a system that forces people to pay for a basic need.
They are the same thing. They hoard up land and then don't sell that land when housing for the area is extremely necessary until it is profitable for them.
Landlords hoard property, and then make money off of the basic necessity of housing.
It's the same goddamn thing. They feed off each other.
Did I say they were limitless? No, I didn't, but you sure as hell built a strawman out of something I didn't say. Er...maybe we should try and prevent the exploitation of people? Wtf
I said basic housing should be a human right. Like everyone should get a decent place to live, let's say baseline is a 1 bedroom apartment with kitchen, bathroom, necessary appliances (stove, fridge, etc). Families should get larger space based on what they need. We do this by building and properly maintaining public housing.This is such myopic way!
You seem to think that only mortgaged landlords exists. If I labored for 10 years to buy a property and rent it out, I did build it with my labor. Just because there's a mortgage on it, doesn't mean someone is not on the hook for all the liabilities it entails. Just because I didn't do things on my own, doesn't mean my labor is not related.
"People being forced to pay for a basic need" sounds like a horrible statement, but basic needs are not satisfied magically and in vacuum.
Let me put it this way
Rent is in the short run always cheaper than owning
Owning is in the long run always cheaper than renting
Also no, if you market goes up, rents go up, if market goes down, rents stop increasing (almost never go down). So no, giving away free houses is only a stop-gap solution, as the market always dries. People do want to move out, make their own families and thrive, this is not some static market.
So when you are renting, you are satisfying your housing need with your own labor at a discounted rate per month. It would take more of your labor per month to get similar housing.
Do you want to give free housing to the people in need? Great! I support that. But that housing should never be seen as a permanent situation, because your labor contribution to society should increase with time or at least your stability should increase enough that you own.
If you hoard too much land, someone, somewhere, will develop other type of housing that will bring your land price down. There is no real monopoly on land, as developers can always build more housing and people start to leave expensive cities to more affordable ones and develop those instead.
I clearly asked, what the limits are. So what are the limits on the human right?
I said basic housing should be a human right. Like everyone should get a decent place to live, let's say baseline is a 1 bedroom apartment with kitchen, bathroom, necessary appliances (stove, fridge, etc). Families should get larger space based on what they need. We do this by building and properly maintaining public housing.
This is such myopic way!
You seem to think that only mortgaged landlords exists. If I labored for 10 years to buy a property and rent it out, I did build it with my labor. Just because there's a mortgage on it, doesn't mean someone is not on the hook for all the liabilities it entails. Just because I didn't do things on my own, doesn't mean my labor is not related.
"People being forced to pay for a basic need" sounds like a horrible statement, but basic needs are not satisfied magically and in vacuum.
If you agree than why create strawmen about homeowners being kicked out of their living space then? Yes I support giving money directly to people. They still need to be provided with housing though.Agreed on this. Public housing has shown to be useless and leads to serious degrading in life quality. So what about UI, temporary rent checks and expansion and better regulation of section 8 housing
Because you are pinning the whole of the problem on the service provider, that's lopsided.If you agree than why create strawmen about homeowners out of their living space then? Yes I support giving money directly to people. They still need to be provided with housing though.
What is wrong with capitalizing "basic needs". Labor needs to be done to fulfill those needs, and someone has to pay for that labor. Do you grow your own food? Or make your own medicine?So basically your argument is that there's nothing wrong with capitalizing on basic needs because people should be entitled to profit off that need and make people suffer for that need at the whims of a bunch of rich people? That again just sounds like entitlement for sake of profiting and imposing your interests/wills on the local community.
propety is the the foundational pillar of inequality.
you can say "oh no that's commie talk" and feel good about yourself but this has been basically accepted in studies of inequality streching back to the enlightenment.
trying to get me to care about landlords is not gonna work, housing is a human right
Thispropety is the the foundational pillar of inequality.
you can say "oh no that's commie talk" and feel good about yourself but this has been basically accepted in studies of inequality streching back to the enlightenment.
trying to get me to care about landlords is not gonna work, housing is a human right
Uh...no I'm pinning the blame on the system, which landlords are a big part of. The 'labor' of landlords is inherently extractive and exploitative. I knew you would start bullshit comparisons with agriculture and other production industries lol, predictable AF. Growing food and making medicine is not inherently exploitative (though under capitalism it often ends up being that way through the use of trafficked labor and practices of drug companies and the medical industry). You can compensate a farmer for his labor fairly, you can compensate a pharmacist or doctor for their labor fairly.Because you are pinning the whole of the problem on the service provider, that's lopsided.
What is wrong with capitalizing "basic needs". Labor needs to be done to fulfill those needs, and someone has to pay for that labor. Do you grow your own food? Or make your own medicine?
Profit is not bad.
Unregulated and predatory profiteering is bad.
By saying "abolish landlords" and "landlords hoard land" you are just pinning a complex issue to one kind of service provider.
You are right. Known Socialist Adam Smith proves how right you are.Absolutely this. Landlords aren't inherently evil (outside of a socialist perspective).
Inequality in the Marx isn't you have a shed and i don't so that's evil, it's about the private control of industry and productive wealth.Because you are pinning the whole of the problem on the service provider, that's lopsided.
What is wrong with capitalizing "basic needs". Labor needs to be done to fulfill those needs, and someone has to pay for that labor. Do you grow your own food? Or make your own medicine?
Profit is not bad.
Unregulated and predatory profiteering is bad.
By saying "abolish landlords" and "landlords hoard land" you are just pinning a complex issue to one kind of service provider.
Well of course. Equality is not a human right though and it is commie talk because if you extend that thought process you get to equality.
I'm rather for better regulations and more social safety nets.
Because you are pinning the whole of the problem on the service provider, that's lopsided.
What is wrong with capitalizing "basic needs". Labor needs to be done to fulfill those needs, and someone has to pay for that labor. Do you grow your own food? Or make your own medicine?
Profit is not bad.
Unregulated and predatory profiteering is bad.
By saying "abolish landlords" and "landlords hoard land" you are just pinning a complex issue to one kind of service provider.
Well of course. Equality is not a human right though and it is commie talk because if you extend that thought process you get to equality.
I'm rather for better regulations and more social safety nets.
The 'labor' of a landlord is just wielding their capital to buy up housing stock and then use that property to extract wealth from the local populace for as long as possible. They aren't producing a good with their labor or providing a necessary service, instead they are entering into communities and creating adverse situations that they then use to profit. There are definitely people involved in the housing process who do actual labor (like people who do repairs) but that's separate from landlording and would exist without the exploitation of landlording.
You don't think landlords provide a service? I live in an apartment complex and my landlord provides maintenance, lawn care, grounds clean up, they maintain the parking lot, clean the public hallways and the laundry room. They run a pool, maintain a playground. They tow away cars parked illegally and provide security and emergency maintenance 24 hours a day.
What kind of shit landlord do you have that rents property and provides zero service on top of that.
You live in a fucking imaginary bubble guy.
oh shit? I have political clout? fuck me thats funny cause every time i call or email ted cruz or john cornyn or pete olson i get a nice form letter telling me im full of shit.
I think some of you think of landlords as these heartless multi millionaires or corporations that have 1000s of properties. most landlods are just regular people with regular jobs that maybe have 1-5 homes for rent to try and make extra money. Of course there are dicks, like everything else. No one should be evicting people right now. But the government should have done any number of things to help stop this.
A regular person who owns a one to five additional more homes huh? Now that isn't a regular person .
You don't think landlords provide a service? I live in an apartment complex and my landlord provides maintenance, lawn care, grounds clean up, they maintain the parking lot, clean the public hallways and the laundry room. They run a pool, maintain a playground. They tow away cars parked illegally and provide security and emergency maintenance 24 hours a day.
What kind of shit landlord do you have that rents property and provides zero service on top of that.
You live in a fucking imaginary bubble guy.
You know based on the thread title I was expecting a longer conversation about how bad renters have it but of course Era has a landlord defense force.
The landlord doesn't directly provide that service. Workers provide that service, but the landlord is the one that receives most of the profits just because they lord over the property.
There's a landlord defense force everywhere, at least in America. It's an extremely touchy subject because so many people either are friends / family with a landlord or are on themselves. At the very hint of criticism of the system that benefits landlord you immediately encounter resistance.
The landlord doesn't do any of that labor though, they hire workers to do that. Workers that could and would be hired with the absence of the landlordYou don't think landlords provide a service? I live in an apartment complex and my landlord provides maintenance, lawn care, grounds clean up, they maintain the parking lot, clean the public hallways and the laundry room. They run a pool, maintain a playground. They tow away cars parked illegally and provide security and emergency maintenance 24 hours a day.
What kind of shit landlord do you have that rents property and provides zero service on top of that.
You live in a fucking imaginary bubble guy.
Adamn Smith hated landlords only because he was jealous and thought they were lazy. You really think he would support public housing??You are right. Known Socialist Adam Smith proves how right you are.
"[Landlords] are the only one of the three orders whose revenue costs them neither labour nor care, but comes to them, as it were, of its own accord, and independent of any plan or project of their own. That indolence, which is the natural effect of the ease and security of their situation, renders them too often, not only ignorant, but incapable of that application of mind"
Exactly.Adamn Smith hated landlords only because he thought they were lazy.
Lol what?? Are you comparing the jealousy of a capitalist who has to work to ACAB???? Really???????Exactly.
Also, how do you feel about ACAB? The animosity towards landlords is... Kinda the same as ACAB!
I will get banned for this, but you are not very bright.Lol what?? Are you comparing the jealousy of a capitalist who has to work to ACAB???? Really???????
Lol, tell me, when a landlord gets sued, do the other landlords come to their rescue to cover the liability up? Because that's the literally the difference between this discussion and ACAB.I will get banned for this, but you are not very bright.
In no way I was comparing what Smith thought (also jealousy lmao) to ACAB, but why people who hate landlords think of them as that.
Again, you don't shine, brother. I said it's comparable, not equally the same.Lol, tell me, when a landlord gets sued, do the other landlords come to their rescue to cover the liability up? Because that's the literally the difference between this discussion and ACAB.
You clearly don't know what ACAB really means.
See, it's not comparable lol. And i will go off, because the comparison was stupid.Again, you don't shine, brother. I said it's comparable, not equally the same.
But go off.
The landlord doesn't do any of that labor though, they hire workers to do that. Workers that could and would be hired with the absence of the landlord
Sure, but I'm talking about the system overall. There are exceptions, but if your father only owned four small properties and did 90% of the labor on them...then he was doing labor and thus what I said obviously does not apply to him in terms of that labor. He SHOULD be fairly compensated for home repairs. That doesn't change the fact that the landlording part is extractive though. People still need skilled labor to assist with home repairs without landlords.When you paint with a broad brush you're bound to make mistakes. My father for example is a working class man that rented out 4 mobile homes while I was growing up. He worked his tail off to maintain them, doing 90% of the labor himself (with some help from me). His tenants would often take advantage of him and when they couldn't pay they would wreck the place. Not all renters are poor downtrodden folks that are being taken advantage of, the opposite can also be true.
It also means all people should be housed. The programs you outlined, while necessary, have not solved the problem of homelessness. We need to do more. Similarly, SNAP has not solved hunger in this country. It's a necessary program but we need to do more.i think people misunderstand what "housing is a human right" means.
right now, under our capitalist system, we view housing as a simple market commodity just like any other good. the right to housing means that the government has the responsibility to intervene in this system and take steps to ensure that everyone has access to affordable housing, which is typically through credits (section 8) or inclusionary zoning (requiring developments to set aside a portion of units for lower income residents). the government also needs to provide remedies to tenants for various problems they may face, like habitability issues or unfair evictions. we face large shortages in housing right now, and i can't really blame the developers for that, because the costs of developing are so high in places like SF, LA, and NYC. the level of government intervention needs to drastically increase if we are to do anything about the millions of homeless in this country.
food and water are clearly human rights too but no one is saying that restaurants should be serving you for free or that you should just be able to take whatever you need from the grocer. instead, we have programs like SNAP (food stamps) to help lower income people get adequate nutrition.
the bottom line is whether you have access to housing shouldn't depend on how much money you have.
Sure, but I'm talking about the system overall. There are exceptions, but if your father only owned four small properties and did 90% of the labor on them...then he was doing labor and thus what I said obviously does not apply to him in terms of that labor. He SHOULD be fairly compensated for home repairs. That doesn't change the fact that the landlording part is extractive though. People still need skilled labor to assist with home repairs without landlords.
Right, they should be compensated for labor like repairs. I do not believe that people should own tons of property and use that property to extract wealth from others. Landlording is extracting wealth, providing labor like home repairs is not. There is a pretty clear distinction here.We all need other people to help us and provide essential goods and services. People should not go without food, shelter, education, or healthcare. But as you said the folks who provide these things should be compensated for their time and labor. And as I said previously there are landlords who provide these things themselves.
Not all landlords are LLCs that pay someone to manage their properties who then in turn schedule and pay other people to do essential maintenance and repairs. That is extractive, the people who own that LLC contribute nothing.
Yeah this shit sucks so bad lolMy landlord is still requiring quarters for the laundry machines.