2 ms·

Nearly every state has a program to provide some rental payments back to the landlord. It's going to be less and more delayed than rent payments, but that's ex

• bluGill 5y ago
  > Renting isn't, and shouldn't be risk free. That goes both ways, as a renter you risk getting kicked out, while as the landlord you risk not getting paid. Landlords typically evict and get someone who will pay but they were unable to. While there were programs for landlords, it was hard to get money out of them for various reasons.
  • aaomidi 5y ago
    > That goes both ways Did I imply it doesn't? Evictions are no longer banned at a national scale. So, uh, yeah? We already know it goes both ways. In this special circumstance, the government essentially came in and said "We're not going to allow you to do that type of business for a bit for the sake of society." Landlords by definition exist because the state allows them to exist. If the state wasn't there, landlords would probably be at the mercy of the 90% - and things would get ugly. So, to keep enjoying those protections that the government is giving, you need to follow circumstantial business changes. Such as a pandemic.
  • einpoklum 5y ago
    If free high-quality public housing is available as an alternative to renting, then fine. Otherwise, why should renting not be essentially-risk-free? People don't rent as some sort of risky adventure, they need a place to live. I mean, medicine is socialized (*) so that living will be "risk-free" health-wise, so why not housing? (*) - Yes, I know that doesn't hold in the US...