3 ms·

It's my honestly held belief that private landlords (both private individuals and even more so corporate) are systemically pushed to provide the least amount of

It's my honestly held belief that private landlords (both private individuals and even more so corporate) are systemically pushed to provide the least amount of maintenance, repair, and amenities for the most amount of money. Having a market based system for a necessity, especially when the market is allowed to get as incredibly distorted as it has (in the US and Western Europe), is a moral travesty. I have just given up trying to be nice about this, despite HN's capitalist slant

prepend 4y ago
> Having a market based system for a necessity, especially when the market is allowed to get as incredibly distorted as it has (in the US and Western Europe), is a moral travesty Markets for food work pretty well. And for loans. Markets are pretty efficient. That doesn’t mean you don’t regulate them.
- polygamous_bat 4y ago
  > Markets for food work pretty well. Please look up how much subsidy is given to the American farmers. It's probably more than you think it is. > And for loans. Might have agreed more with you, but then 2008 happened.
pxmpxm 4y ago
> systemically pushed to provide the least amount of maintenance, repair, and amenities for the most amount of money That argument can literally be applied to any product or service, yet here we are. There is a peculiar correlation I have noticed with these views - it tends to be (white) upper middle class suburban upbringing Americans that profess them. Principal agent problem of sorts, I guess.
tomcam 4y ago
How much property are you renting at a loss to assist others?
tempestn 4y ago
This take I can see, that market forces (especially in the presence of distortions like rent controls) do not provide the best result for tenants, and that better systems are possible. What I don't believe follows is that given our existing system, individual landlords are doing something wrong. It kind of reminds me of the argument that philanthropy is bad because individual rich people shouldn't get to choose who is helped; governments should tax the rich more and use it to help people. Well yeah, I agree, they should. But if they don't, it certainly doesn't make someone a bad person for choosing to voluntarily donate to charity.

prepend 4y ago

> Having a market based system for a necessity, especially when the market is allowed to get as incredibly distorted as it has (in the US and Western Europe), is a moral travesty Markets for food work pretty well. And for loans. Markets are pretty efficient. That doesn’t mean you don’t regulate them.

polygamous_bat 4y ago
> Markets for food work pretty well. Please look up how much subsidy is given to the American farmers. It's probably more than you think it is. > And for loans. Might have agreed more with you, but then 2008 happened.

pxmpxm 4y ago

> systemically pushed to provide the least amount of maintenance, repair, and amenities for the most amount of money That argument can literally be applied to any product or service, yet here we are. There is a peculiar correlation I have noticed with these views - it tends to be (white) upper middle class suburban upbringing Americans that profess them. Principal agent problem of sorts, I guess.

tomcam 4y ago

How much property are you renting at a loss to assist others?

tempestn 4y ago

This take I can see, that market forces (especially in the presence of distortions like rent controls) do not provide the best result for tenants, and that better systems are possible. What I don't believe follows is that given our existing system, individual landlords are doing something wrong. It kind of reminds me of the argument that philanthropy is bad because individual rich people shouldn't get to choose who is helped; governments should tax the rich more and use it to help people. Well yeah, I agree, they should. But if they don't, it certainly doesn't make someone a bad person for choosing to voluntarily donate to charity.