3 ms·

You pay rent in return for the right of use of the property. Generally you do this because you either do not have the necessary credit to obtain your own prope

by zaroth 6y ago

You pay rent in return for the right of use of the property. Generally you do this because you either do not have the necessary credit to obtain your own property, can not afford the transaction costs of buying/selling a property in your desired timeframe, or simply want the convenience of not having to maintain it yourself. None of this is really the point. Generally when people pay for a service, if they stop paying, the company is allowed to stop providing the service. Eviction laws already impose a higher bar on “stopping service” in the case of rental housing, but an outright moratorium on evictions is just another way the government response to COVID wipes out small/independent business for the benefit of mega corporations. No one should be forced by government decree to offer their property or services for free. I’m sure at some point there is a Constitutional issue to be argued.

ethanbond 6y ago
I think I'm going to launch a new business format where we lease out air for people to breathe, and then convince them that I'm doing them a service by allowing them to breathe it. In any case, I'm not asking for a moratorium on eviction per se. I'm a proponent of giving landlords 100% of the revenues created by their property, but 0% of the revenues created by the things around their property. The Land Value Tax (LVT) mentioned elsewhere on this thread is exactly that.
- zaroth 6y ago
  If politicians decide to make it illegal to charge rent, or to evict people who don’t pay their rent, they should be anticipating the short and long term effects, and they should be expected to compensate property owners. In this case it’s fair to note as TFA does that the burden will be disproportionately borne by individual landlords holding low income housing. The more units someone holds the more diversified and the less likely this new government policy will wipe them out. Perhaps it is the law of unintended consequences that a policy like this will cause long-term harm to renters by centralizing the market and reducing competition. Also worth noting that the end result of a foreclosure is not just the renter losing their home, but maybe the landlord as well. I don’t understand your quip about renting air. I can understand somewhat being angered over turning a residential home into a short-term AirBnB. But buying a property and renting it is making housing more accessible not less, and a market of individual landlords each buying one house and renting it is extremely competitive. If we were debating whether the government should pay landlords monthly for their vacant units we could agree that bailouts are not appropriate. But forcing someone to rent their personal property for free is not generally ethical or legal. Real Estate taxes are an interesting debate. It’s worth mentioning that whatever the tax rate, the cost of taxes is largely borne by the renter. In fact taxes are a major component of rent cost. Assuming you bundle no services at all (landscaping, utilities, etc.), a property generally cannot rent for less than their taxes, interest, upkeep/depreciation, and a risk adjusted return. There are a massive number of options for investors, they won’t choose to invest in a vehicle which doesn’t cover those four basic things. There are some very narrow circumstances where an investor might depend on equity appreciation to make up for an operating loss. This is more akin to speculating than investing and is significantly more risky.

by zaroth 6y ago

ethanbond 6y ago

I think I'm going to launch a new business format where we lease out air for people to breathe, and then convince them that I'm doing them a service by allowing them to breathe it. In any case, I'm not asking for a moratorium on eviction per se. I'm a proponent of giving landlords 100% of the revenues created by their property, but 0% of the revenues created by the things around their property. The Land Value Tax (LVT) mentioned elsewhere on this thread is exactly that.

zaroth 6y ago
If politicians decide to make it illegal to charge rent, or to evict people who don’t pay their rent, they should be anticipating the short and long term effects, and they should be expected to compensate property owners. In this case it’s fair to note as TFA does that the burden will be disproportionately borne by individual landlords holding low income housing. The more units someone holds the more diversified and the less likely this new government policy will wipe them out. Perhaps it is the law of unintended consequences that a policy like this will cause long-term harm to renters by centralizing the market and reducing competition. Also worth noting that the end result of a foreclosure is not just the renter losing their home, but maybe the landlord as well. I don’t understand your quip about renting air. I can understand somewhat being angered over turning a residential home into a short-term AirBnB. But buying a property and renting it is making housing more accessible not less, and a market of individual landlords each buying one house and renting it is extremely competitive. If we were debating whether the government should pay landlords monthly for their vacant units we could agree that bailouts are not appropriate. But forcing someone to rent their personal property for free is not generally ethical or legal. Real Estate taxes are an interesting debate. It’s worth mentioning that whatever the tax rate, the cost of taxes is largely borne by the renter. In fact taxes are a major component of rent cost. Assuming you bundle no services at all (landscaping, utilities, etc.), a property generally cannot rent for less than their taxes, interest, upkeep/depreciation, and a risk adjusted return. There are a massive number of options for investors, they won’t choose to invest in a vehicle which doesn’t cover those four basic things. There are some very narrow circumstances where an investor might depend on equity appreciation to make up for an operating loss. This is more akin to speculating than investing and is significantly more risky.