4 ms·

I find this article pretty infuriating. Poverty and housing insecurity are definite societal problems, but does that make it the fault or responsibility of eac

I find this article pretty infuriating. Poverty and housing insecurity are definite societal problems, but does that make it the fault or responsibility of each individual landlord? The author of this article basically stole tens of thousands of dollars in free housing from some private party and then wrote an article blaming them for the end result. There was apparently no attempt to work something out, no attempt to move out without being forced out, no recognition of their own responsibility in this situation, and I suspect no ultimate attempt to pay back what they owe. I have owned several small rental properties for almost 15 years. I’ve had to evict two tenants, never getting quite to the point of having the Sheriff show up while we pile their stuff on the curb, but I have that scheduled right now for Feb 22. This tenant has not paid their rent since Oct. The eviction has been grinding through the process since Nov. Every week, it’s a different sob story about the bad luck that is preventing this tenant from paying their rent. I’m not a monster. I don’t want to force anyone out. But seriously, what am I supposed to do? I can’t afford to just let my tenants not pay rent, and without the threat of eviction, some wouldn’t. So seriously, what am I supposed to do? I’ve been at this long enough that I know the answer: give one second chance, then evict. But it still infuriates me to see people who are happy to steal from me write articles implying that I’m a racist heartless monster because I dare provide market-rate housing and hold them to their word when they sign a lease. EDIT: think of it like this: someone hires you to work on their website idea. You work for months, fully fulfilling your end, then they refuse to pay. You take them to court and “win” (though you still never collect), then they write an article about how web developers are too greedy and expensive and they actually have the audacity to demand payment for their work!

nsnick 9y ago
Maybe he was already in a lease and could not get out of it without paying money to the property management that he did not have. Your response demonstrates a complete lack of compassion and I hope you end up in his situation some day so that you may develop some empathy.
- ryanwaggoner 9y ago
  I’m positive he was in a lease. I’m equally positive that it would have been better for him to break that lease and just not pay the fees than to drag this out to its inevitable conclusion, which cost everyone else more money in the end. Also, why did he actually make them put his stuff on the street? Why not just move it into the storage space instead before they showed up?
throwawayjava 9y ago
The first sentence of the fourth paragraph is not even necessary given the first sentence of the post. That's not a criticism, and I'm not heartless. It's just true :) More seriously, what you're supposed to do is undermine yourself. Support efforts to substantially decrease the market rate of housing. As a very, VERY purposeful non-landlord who has never missed a rent check or mortgage payment, I don't have any sympathy for land lords. I understand your financial and moral viewpoint, but I don't find it redeemable. So. That's the analog of your viewpoint. Not deadbeats, but your financial equals who don't see anything redeemable about lordship.
- ryanwaggoner 9y ago
  The difference is, I’ve been on both sides. I’ve never owned my own residence, always rented. If you had bills to pay for rental properties that you bought, you might understand my side a little more. But maybe not. It kind of sounds like you’re just upset about rent being too high (me too!) and think individual market sellers should charge well below market rates to “do something”. Sometimes I do that, actually. I have a tenant who has lived in my building since I bought it and I’ve never raised his rent. It’s substantially below market rate but he’s older and a model tenant so I just leave him be. But your approach doesn’t make sense at a broad level. The cost of tech labor is too high for many startups. Do you negotiate a lower salary to try and do your part to lower the market rate? But again, I’m irredeemable so not sure why I’m bothering to respond :)
  - throwawayjava 9y ago
    On the contrary, I'm not a landlord precisely because I understand that game, and I prefer a nice game of chess. People who don't empathize with you aren't always misinformed. Sometimes there are fundamental moral incongruities. There are apt analogies of "the system is fucked and I'm just working in it" throughout US history.
    - ryanwaggoner 9y ago
      Ah, but I’d argue that you are playing that game, because it’s just incredibly basic supply and demand. So whether you have a job or provide jobs or own or rent or buy things at the store or sell things online, you’re playing this game too. And you only get to play your side because someone else plays the other side. Seems pretty morally incongruent to call them irredeemable for voluntarily selling or buying from you, doesn’t it? Edit: for example, if you’ve rented or bought, you’ve contributed to the demand that makes the market price go up. If you were a landlord, at least you’d be helping provide supply that keeps the price in check :)
kelnos 9y ago
> Poverty and housing insecurity are definite societal problems, but does that make it the fault or responsibility of each individual landlord? I've been living in the SF bay area for nearly 15 years, and in SF itself for half of that. I've watched rent prices go up. The only reason those prices went up was because of higher demand. The higher prices didn't get anyone anything extra: the properties weren't maintained any better, or renovated or upgraded faster or better. On the landlord's side, there were no magical new costs coming into the equation to justify the higher rents. If a landlord could rent out a place in 2005 for $1500/mo (and cover all costs and make some profit), there's no need for them to rent it out for $4000/mo in 2018. They're doing that because they want to and because they know someone will pay it. I'll absolutely agree that's capitalism in action right there, and in general that's not a bad thing. But we get gentrification and displacement as part of that bargain. So yes, landlords should accept some of the burden of fault and responsibility. I'm not saying there isn't plenty to spread around, between existing homeowners, the city government, and incoming renters/homebuyers themselves, but... nope, sorry, landlords don't get to pretend they're innocent in all this. (As an aside: I see you posting a lot on this article, and I want to say that I don't think you're "irredeemable" or greedy or whatever. I'm happy you've chosen to engage and have a productive discussion, at the very least. I just think you might be getting a little caught up in... something... and are missing the point that we're talking about housing and homelessness here, and that's a terrible thing for someone to have to fall into, regardless of reason or fault. Assuming you've been financially responsible on your end, missing rent payments from a tenant for a few months shouldn't put you out on the street, but... you as a landlord do have the power to put someone out on the street, and it'd be nice if you'd be cognizant of the extra power you have.)
- georgeecollins 9y ago
  How is the price of rent going up the fault of landlords, when terrible urban planning (and NIMBYism) has limited housing in the Bay Area for decades. In the Bay Area, blaming landlords is shooting the messenger. The truth is that in a lot of these places existing homeowners are happy to see people priced out. At the same time, job growth is getting more concentrated in expensive urban environments. Local governments respond to local (property) tax payers, who don't mind gentrification. State and national governments do nothing, because the political pressure is zero. So, yeah blame the landlord.
Eridrus 9y ago
I agree that putting this on individual landlords isn't the right move, but if you want moral absolution, you should consider what you can do to help increase availability and decrease the market rate throughout your metro, particularly politically.

nsnick 9y ago

Maybe he was already in a lease and could not get out of it without paying money to the property management that he did not have. Your response demonstrates a complete lack of compassion and I hope you end up in his situation some day so that you may develop some empathy.

ryanwaggoner 9y ago
I’m positive he was in a lease. I’m equally positive that it would have been better for him to break that lease and just not pay the fees than to drag this out to its inevitable conclusion, which cost everyone else more money in the end. Also, why did he actually make them put his stuff on the street? Why not just move it into the storage space instead before they showed up?

throwawayjava 9y ago

The first sentence of the fourth paragraph is not even necessary given the first sentence of the post. That's not a criticism, and I'm not heartless. It's just true :) More seriously, what you're supposed to do is undermine yourself. Support efforts to substantially decrease the market rate of housing. As a very, VERY purposeful non-landlord who has never missed a rent check or mortgage payment, I don't have any sympathy for land lords. I understand your financial and moral viewpoint, but I don't find it redeemable. So. That's the analog of your viewpoint. Not deadbeats, but your financial equals who don't see anything redeemable about lordship.

ryanwaggoner 9y ago
The difference is, I’ve been on both sides. I’ve never owned my own residence, always rented. If you had bills to pay for rental properties that you bought, you might understand my side a little more. But maybe not. It kind of sounds like you’re just upset about rent being too high (me too!) and think individual market sellers should charge well below market rates to “do something”. Sometimes I do that, actually. I have a tenant who has lived in my building since I bought it and I’ve never raised his rent. It’s substantially below market rate but he’s older and a model tenant so I just leave him be. But your approach doesn’t make sense at a broad level. The cost of tech labor is too high for many startups. Do you negotiate a lower salary to try and do your part to lower the market rate? But again, I’m irredeemable so not sure why I’m bothering to respond :)
- throwawayjava 9y ago
  On the contrary, I'm not a landlord precisely because I understand that game, and I prefer a nice game of chess. People who don't empathize with you aren't always misinformed. Sometimes there are fundamental moral incongruities. There are apt analogies of "the system is fucked and I'm just working in it" throughout US history.
  - ryanwaggoner 9y ago
    Ah, but I’d argue that you are playing that game, because it’s just incredibly basic supply and demand. So whether you have a job or provide jobs or own or rent or buy things at the store or sell things online, you’re playing this game too. And you only get to play your side because someone else plays the other side. Seems pretty morally incongruent to call them irredeemable for voluntarily selling or buying from you, doesn’t it? Edit: for example, if you’ve rented or bought, you’ve contributed to the demand that makes the market price go up. If you were a landlord, at least you’d be helping provide supply that keeps the price in check :)

kelnos 9y ago

> Poverty and housing insecurity are definite societal problems, but does that make it the fault or responsibility of each individual landlord? I've been living in the SF bay area for nearly 15 years, and in SF itself for half of that. I've watched rent prices go up. The only reason those prices went up was because of higher demand. The higher prices didn't get anyone anything extra: the properties weren't maintained any better, or renovated or upgraded faster or better. On the landlord's side, there were no magical new costs coming into the equation to justify the higher rents. If a landlord could rent out a place in 2005 for $1500/mo (and cover all costs and make some profit), there's no need for them to rent it out for $4000/mo in 2018. They're doing that because they want to and because they know someone will pay it. I'll absolutely agree that's capitalism in action right there, and in general that's not a bad thing. But we get gentrification and displacement as part of that bargain. So yes, landlords should accept some of the burden of fault and responsibility. I'm not saying there isn't plenty to spread around, between existing homeowners, the city government, and incoming renters/homebuyers themselves, but... nope, sorry, landlords don't get to pretend they're innocent in all this. (As an aside: I see you posting a lot on this article, and I want to say that I don't think you're "irredeemable" or greedy or whatever. I'm happy you've chosen to engage and have a productive discussion, at the very least. I just think you might be getting a little caught up in... something... and are missing the point that we're talking about housing and homelessness here, and that's a terrible thing for someone to have to fall into, regardless of reason or fault. Assuming you've been financially responsible on your end, missing rent payments from a tenant for a few months shouldn't put you out on the street, but... you as a landlord do have the power to put someone out on the street, and it'd be nice if you'd be cognizant of the extra power you have.)

georgeecollins 9y ago
How is the price of rent going up the fault of landlords, when terrible urban planning (and NIMBYism) has limited housing in the Bay Area for decades. In the Bay Area, blaming landlords is shooting the messenger. The truth is that in a lot of these places existing homeowners are happy to see people priced out. At the same time, job growth is getting more concentrated in expensive urban environments. Local governments respond to local (property) tax payers, who don't mind gentrification. State and national governments do nothing, because the political pressure is zero. So, yeah blame the landlord.

Eridrus 9y ago

I agree that putting this on individual landlords isn't the right move, but if you want moral absolution, you should consider what you can do to help increase availability and decrease the market rate throughout your metro, particularly politically.