6 ms·

> We should get rid of landlords How? Please elaborate. In places that did this, usually a new set of more evil landlords took over after mass killing: https

> We should get rid of landlords How? Please elaborate. In places that did this, usually a new set of more evil landlords took over after mass killing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_Reform_Movement_(China) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_Reform_Movement_(China) "Landlords had their land confiscated and they were subjected mass killing by the CCP and former tenants,[2][3] with the estimated death toll ranging from hundreds of thousands to millions.[4][5][6]" This should probably be required reading for everyone before they comment on housing: "Housing Breaks People’s Brains" https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/11/us-housing-supply-shortage-crisis-2022/672240/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/11/us-housing... The problem is a simple lack of supply not evil landlords. Not convinced? https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/08/02/as-national-eviction-ban-expires-a-look-at-who-rents-and-who-owns-in-the-u-s/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/08/02/as-national... > In fact, fewer than one-fifth of rental properties are owned by for-profit businesses of any kind. Most rental properties – about seven-in-ten – are owned by individuals, who typically own just one or two properties, according to 2018 census data. And landlords have complained about being unable to meet their obligations, such as mortgage payments, property taxes and repair bills, because of a falloff in rent payments. Edit: And of course, a comment with references is riddled with downvotes with no responses :), so predictable , while the original with an emotional "get rid of a class of people" stays positive.

andrepd 4y ago
Nobody is arguing for mass killings of landlords, so your comment is getting the minimum-effort responses it deserves.
- aaomidi 4y ago
  Interesting that you thought I’m suggesting mass killing. I think honestly you should look into why you thought that’s what I’m talking about?
kelseyfrog 4y ago
> How? Please elaborate. Ignoring all other factors, it's quite easy. The landloard-tennant social relation is able to exist because the legal system has a system of laws backed the threat of violence to secure and perpetuate its existence. To deconstruct the social relation as such, one would need to catalog federal, state, and local code to identify which clauses establish houses, apartments, condos, etc as private property and remove them. Voila! the legal construction of landlords no longer exists. without the threat of state violence, landlords cease to become a social category. If this sounds terrible to you, please refer to the first clause of this comment.
- indymike 4y ago
  > The landloard-tennant social relation is able to exist because the legal system has a system of laws backed the threat of violence to secure and perpetuate its existence. So, if no one can own the property, then high rent will be solved with a state monopoly?
  - kelseyfrog 4y ago
    I think it's a little bit of a false dichotomy and a deficit of creativity that the only two conceivable ownership models for housing have to be private or public. There are an infinite number of ways to conceive of housing, than those two. Just try.
    - indymike 4y ago
      > There are an infinite number of ways to conceive of housing, than those two. Just try. I'm not sure where you are going with this, because there really are only a few options, all of which fall into two buckets: private ownership or government/state/tribal ownership.
- carom 4y ago
  We could simply remove density restrictions. Landlords are not your enemy, and hear me out on this one, single family homes are. Zoning limits the competition for property to single households. I can compete and win against a lot of single households for land. I could not compete with 10 households looking to build apartments. It is illegal to build ten apartments on most lots though, so good for me I guess. Landlords own land and make it available to others to use. They generally want to build more housing because they like money. They are a strong ally in the fight for more housing (which means cheaper housing). Single family homes are the enemy.
ilyt 4y ago
> The problem is a simple lack of supply not evil landlords. both can be part of the problem. It's not an one dimensional problem. > In fact, fewer than one-fifth of rental properties are owned by for-profit businesses of any kind. Most rental properties – about seven-in-ten – are owned by individuals, who typically own just one or two properties, according to 2018 census data. And landlords have complained about being unable to meet their obligations, such as mortgage payments, property taxes and repair bills, because of a falloff in rent payments. Oh, so sad they would have to sell the property that was previously just provided stream of passive income at no (many private landlords use companies to manage their properties) effort to them at all.. I'm also so sad for them to only earn a good amount on their "investment" of "being well off enough to convince bank to give the mortgage for an investment property" /s. More than that, this absolute disaster might actually lower the housing pricing a bit and we can't have that now can we ?

andrepd 4y ago

Nobody is arguing for mass killings of landlords, so your comment is getting the minimum-effort responses it deserves.

aaomidi 4y ago
Interesting that you thought I’m suggesting mass killing. I think honestly you should look into why you thought that’s what I’m talking about?

kelseyfrog 4y ago

> How? Please elaborate. Ignoring all other factors, it's quite easy. The landloard-tennant social relation is able to exist because the legal system has a system of laws backed the threat of violence to secure and perpetuate its existence. To deconstruct the social relation as such, one would need to catalog federal, state, and local code to identify which clauses establish houses, apartments, condos, etc as private property and remove them. Voila! the legal construction of landlords no longer exists. without the threat of state violence, landlords cease to become a social category. If this sounds terrible to you, please refer to the first clause of this comment.

indymike 4y ago
> The landloard-tennant social relation is able to exist because the legal system has a system of laws backed the threat of violence to secure and perpetuate its existence. So, if no one can own the property, then high rent will be solved with a state monopoly?
- kelseyfrog 4y ago
  I think it's a little bit of a false dichotomy and a deficit of creativity that the only two conceivable ownership models for housing have to be private or public. There are an infinite number of ways to conceive of housing, than those two. Just try.
  - indymike 4y ago
    > There are an infinite number of ways to conceive of housing, than those two. Just try. I'm not sure where you are going with this, because there really are only a few options, all of which fall into two buckets: private ownership or government/state/tribal ownership.
carom 4y ago
We could simply remove density restrictions. Landlords are not your enemy, and hear me out on this one, single family homes are. Zoning limits the competition for property to single households. I can compete and win against a lot of single households for land. I could not compete with 10 households looking to build apartments. It is illegal to build ten apartments on most lots though, so good for me I guess. Landlords own land and make it available to others to use. They generally want to build more housing because they like money. They are a strong ally in the fight for more housing (which means cheaper housing). Single family homes are the enemy.

ilyt 4y ago

> The problem is a simple lack of supply not evil landlords. both can be part of the problem. It's not an one dimensional problem. > In fact, fewer than one-fifth of rental properties are owned by for-profit businesses of any kind. Most rental properties – about seven-in-ten – are owned by individuals, who typically own just one or two properties, according to 2018 census data. And landlords have complained about being unable to meet their obligations, such as mortgage payments, property taxes and repair bills, because of a falloff in rent payments. Oh, so sad they would have to sell the property that was previously just provided stream of passive income at no (many private landlords use companies to manage their properties) effort to them at all.. I'm also so sad for them to only earn a good amount on their "investment" of "being well off enough to convince bank to give the mortgage for an investment property" /s. More than that, this absolute disaster might actually lower the housing pricing a bit and we can't have that now can we ?