4 ms·

I don't really see the point of this article, Because you lack empathy and perspective? People can be forced into bankruptcy for all sorts of reasons that are

I don't really see the point of this article, Because you lack empathy and perspective? People can be forced into bankruptcy for all sorts of reasons that are largely beyond their control (such as the example you are implicitly referring to in the article). Doesn't mean they should be homeless (or limited to the most marginal of housing conditions) for the rest of their life. Especially if they have nursed their score back to a reasonable state of health. A tenant can easily pay rent two or three times, and then stretch out the eviction proceedings for 6 to 18 months depending on the state. This seems overdrawn (i.e. out of synch with reality). In the one state for which I am intimately familiar with these proceedings (and another certain very large blue state that I did a fair amount of research on at one point), a properly executed eviction proceeding should take no more than 120 days or so, even assuming delays in the court calendar (except in weird outlier cases like the city can't determine the zoning or protection status of the property, etc). I can imagine there a few states with as grossly dysfunctional (general case) eviction proceeding standards like you describe, but not ... all that many states.

999900000999 5y ago
Oh, I've been through two evictions, but I can also see landlords aren't charities. If you have a bankruptcy on your credit report, no landlord in their right mind is going to want to rent to you. It's very easy to stretch out an eviction for a very long time, it's not fun, but it's doable. Here's the rub, a mom and pop landlord can't have half their tenants not pay rent for 6 months, but Greystone can. And big corporate landlords are more likely to be strict when it comes to renters.
- akhmatova 5y ago
  It's very easy to stretch out an eviction for a very long time, it's not fun, but it's doable. In other words, that "6 to 18 months" number was just basically made up.
  - 999900000999 5y ago
    Let's just say I've some personal experience in this... What's their to debate, COVID had 2 year long eviction moratoriums in some parts
    - akhmatova 5y ago
      But in the general case (absent pandemic restrictions which have already been unwound) -- what you've been saying is completely off base.
blindmute 5y ago
If you go bankrupt you are essentially proven to be bad with money. Why would I rent to you? If you don't like it, buy some property like the landlords did.
- akhmatova 5y ago
  If you go bankrupt you are essentially proven to be bad with money. No - per the example in the article, you are proven to have the misfortune of living in a country with a corrupt and dysfunctional healthcare system.
  - blindmute 5y ago
    Not my (a landlord's) problem. Plenty of people didn't have that happen to them. Do you presume that I should have no say on who I allow to live in the home I bought? It's my property
    - akhmatova 5y ago
      Do you presume that I should have no say on who I allow to live in the home I bought? No -- you do not have "no" say. But but the law says there are limits in the criteria you can use to reject candidates. Of which you (as a landlord) are presumably already perfectly aware. As you are of the fact that minute you move out (and establish another legal residence) -- it's no longer your "home". It's my property. Sorry, but this isn't an Ayn Rand novel. In real life, property ownership does not give you 100 percent freedom to do what ever you want with your property. It is a social contract, with obligations and limits.
      - blindmute 5y ago
        Okay. I prefer to vote for people who make it so, and live in places where, that social contract has better terms for me. We've seen what the opposite policies lead to: Seattle, LA, Portland. I would never step foot in those cities again, and everyone knows why.

999900000999 5y ago

Oh, I've been through two evictions, but I can also see landlords aren't charities. If you have a bankruptcy on your credit report, no landlord in their right mind is going to want to rent to you. It's very easy to stretch out an eviction for a very long time, it's not fun, but it's doable. Here's the rub, a mom and pop landlord can't have half their tenants not pay rent for 6 months, but Greystone can. And big corporate landlords are more likely to be strict when it comes to renters.

akhmatova 5y ago
It's very easy to stretch out an eviction for a very long time, it's not fun, but it's doable. In other words, that "6 to 18 months" number was just basically made up.
- 999900000999 5y ago
  Let's just say I've some personal experience in this... What's their to debate, COVID had 2 year long eviction moratoriums in some parts
  - akhmatova 5y ago
    But in the general case (absent pandemic restrictions which have already been unwound) -- what you've been saying is completely off base.

blindmute 5y ago

If you go bankrupt you are essentially proven to be bad with money. Why would I rent to you? If you don't like it, buy some property like the landlords did.

akhmatova 5y ago
If you go bankrupt you are essentially proven to be bad with money. No - per the example in the article, you are proven to have the misfortune of living in a country with a corrupt and dysfunctional healthcare system.
- blindmute 5y ago
  Not my (a landlord's) problem. Plenty of people didn't have that happen to them. Do you presume that I should have no say on who I allow to live in the home I bought? It's my property
  - akhmatova 5y ago
    Do you presume that I should have no say on who I allow to live in the home I bought? No -- you do not have "no" say. But but the law says there are limits in the criteria you can use to reject candidates. Of which you (as a landlord) are presumably already perfectly aware. As you are of the fact that minute you move out (and establish another legal residence) -- it's no longer your "home". It's my property. Sorry, but this isn't an Ayn Rand novel. In real life, property ownership does not give you 100 percent freedom to do what ever you want with your property. It is a social contract, with obligations and limits.
    - blindmute 5y ago
      Okay. I prefer to vote for people who make it so, and live in places where, that social contract has better terms for me. We've seen what the opposite policies lead to: Seattle, LA, Portland. I would never step foot in those cities again, and everyone knows why.