2 ms·

>Landlords do not raise their rents because their own costs increase Their cost definitely increases if the property is on mortgage and their rates went up. Al

>Landlords do not raise their rents because their own costs increase Their cost definitely increases if the property is on mortgage and their rates went up. Also cost in maintenance increase and taxes as well. All those increases for the landlord will directly go into the price of rent for the tenant. They also raise their prices because of supply/demand so someone comes and is willing to pay more. What are you gonna do, say no to more money? The private rental market is still a business and not a charity. Only the public housing is there to cater to the needs of the people and not for profit making. Have you voted for the construction of more public housing?

carlosjobim 3y ago
Operational costs for landlords are marginal. Many of them do little maintenance, many of them do no maintenance. In the situation where they're taking rent to pay a mortgage, then they are not the landlord, they are middlemen for the real landlord: the bank. The dynamic doesn't change. > What are you gonna do, say no to more money? Yes, sometimes you should do that if more money goes against your values. I've said no to more money a ton of times. I shouldn't be surprised, but I am surprised that hackers think that the thought is absurd. It's not being a "charity" to not squeeze as much as you can. When I had a physical business I went out of my way to employ young people from the local community. It never crossed my mind to do things differently, while some of my competitors were taking advantage of cheaper foreign labour. If the idea is to squeeze as much short term profit as possible, nothing is stopping you. But then don't turn around and blame the people who rented the apartments for a higher price. It was the landlords that increased their price. If I'm selling train tickets and then start cancelling the tickets that were already reserved so I could sell them for a greater profit to a foreigner, is it rational to blame the foreigner or me? People do as they please, but put the blame were it belongs and admit you did it for personal profit when the consequences come.
- FirmwareBurner 3y ago
  Sorry I'm not buying your argument. You can spin this as you want, but landlords in the private market are free to charge as much as the market will bear. If the market bears crazy sums then is it the individual landlord at fault, or is the market itself for being broken, as in the supply of housing is too low "thanks" to government building regulations and the demand too high thanks again to government opening the flood gates on immigration? A couple of landlords here and there like you, charging below market rates, is not enough to fix the broken market created by the poorly though out government policies because you're not changing the supply/demand numbers. So again, is it the landlords at fault for the broken market, or is their pricing simply just a reaction to the broken market itself? /Rethorical question Here's a thought exercise: if there's 10 apartments available on the private market and 15 people wanting to move in due to the influx of immigrants, how do you decide who gets to move in and who gets left out if not by purchasing power? How do you decide to fairly split a limited resource like housing without going full communist and have the state own everything and the state decide who gets what? Here's the hard truth: If you're the government and you open the immigration floodgates then you'd better have buikt enough free housing available, or the immediate market reaction is gonna be increased rents for everyone. Simple. What you want is social housing, laxer building regulations, and tighter immigration regulations based on available housing.
  - carlosjobim 3y ago
    > landlords in the private market are free to charge as much as the market will bear. Yes, we all know that. It doesn't mean that they have to, and it doesn't mean somebody else is to blame for the consequences when they do that. Whatever bad incentives the government provides, every person is responsible and is to blame for their business decisions. > Here's a thought exercise: if there's 10 apartments available on the private market and 15 people wanting to move in due to the influx of immigrants, how do you decide who gets to move in and who gets left out if not by purchasing power? If you want to preserve the community, you give priority to people from the community and deny the immigrants. If you expel community members to make room for the immigrants, that is your fault and nobody else's. It's not the immigrant's fault, it is not the government's fault. Human existence is not binary communist/capitalist. Only full blown communists and capitalists think like that. > What you want is social housing No, I don't want that. So if the rent is too expensive for poor people to afford because land lords are hogging real estate, then I have to pay that expensive rent for me and on top of that pay taxes for other people's housing through the government. That is nothing but injustice. If everybody thinks that government regulation is the only way to stop people from abusing each other to the limit, instead of asking for personal responsibility, then don't be surprised when people do something stupid like vote in communists. What other options do you give them, if the answer to their woes is always a variant of "tough luck, get fucked"? Yes, for business and yes for career, those fields should be competitive. But no if decent and hard working people can not afford to live in their own place.
    - FirmwareBurner 3y ago
      Let's just agree to disagree. You blame landlords, I blame poor giovernment policies.

carlosjobim 3y ago

Operational costs for landlords are marginal. Many of them do little maintenance, many of them do no maintenance. In the situation where they're taking rent to pay a mortgage, then they are not the landlord, they are middlemen for the real landlord: the bank. The dynamic doesn't change. > What are you gonna do, say no to more money? Yes, sometimes you should do that if more money goes against your values. I've said no to more money a ton of times. I shouldn't be surprised, but I am surprised that hackers think that the thought is absurd. It's not being a "charity" to not squeeze as much as you can. When I had a physical business I went out of my way to employ young people from the local community. It never crossed my mind to do things differently, while some of my competitors were taking advantage of cheaper foreign labour. If the idea is to squeeze as much short term profit as possible, nothing is stopping you. But then don't turn around and blame the people who rented the apartments for a higher price. It was the landlords that increased their price. If I'm selling train tickets and then start cancelling the tickets that were already reserved so I could sell them for a greater profit to a foreigner, is it rational to blame the foreigner or me? People do as they please, but put the blame were it belongs and admit you did it for personal profit when the consequences come.

FirmwareBurner 3y ago
Sorry I'm not buying your argument. You can spin this as you want, but landlords in the private market are free to charge as much as the market will bear. If the market bears crazy sums then is it the individual landlord at fault, or is the market itself for being broken, as in the supply of housing is too low "thanks" to government building regulations and the demand too high thanks again to government opening the flood gates on immigration? A couple of landlords here and there like you, charging below market rates, is not enough to fix the broken market created by the poorly though out government policies because you're not changing the supply/demand numbers. So again, is it the landlords at fault for the broken market, or is their pricing simply just a reaction to the broken market itself? /Rethorical question Here's a thought exercise: if there's 10 apartments available on the private market and 15 people wanting to move in due to the influx of immigrants, how do you decide who gets to move in and who gets left out if not by purchasing power? How do you decide to fairly split a limited resource like housing without going full communist and have the state own everything and the state decide who gets what? Here's the hard truth: If you're the government and you open the immigration floodgates then you'd better have buikt enough free housing available, or the immediate market reaction is gonna be increased rents for everyone. Simple. What you want is social housing, laxer building regulations, and tighter immigration regulations based on available housing.
- carlosjobim 3y ago
  > landlords in the private market are free to charge as much as the market will bear. Yes, we all know that. It doesn't mean that they have to, and it doesn't mean somebody else is to blame for the consequences when they do that. Whatever bad incentives the government provides, every person is responsible and is to blame for their business decisions. > Here's a thought exercise: if there's 10 apartments available on the private market and 15 people wanting to move in due to the influx of immigrants, how do you decide who gets to move in and who gets left out if not by purchasing power? If you want to preserve the community, you give priority to people from the community and deny the immigrants. If you expel community members to make room for the immigrants, that is your fault and nobody else's. It's not the immigrant's fault, it is not the government's fault. Human existence is not binary communist/capitalist. Only full blown communists and capitalists think like that. > What you want is social housing No, I don't want that. So if the rent is too expensive for poor people to afford because land lords are hogging real estate, then I have to pay that expensive rent for me and on top of that pay taxes for other people's housing through the government. That is nothing but injustice. If everybody thinks that government regulation is the only way to stop people from abusing each other to the limit, instead of asking for personal responsibility, then don't be surprised when people do something stupid like vote in communists. What other options do you give them, if the answer to their woes is always a variant of "tough luck, get fucked"? Yes, for business and yes for career, those fields should be competitive. But no if decent and hard working people can not afford to live in their own place.
  - FirmwareBurner 3y ago
    Let's just agree to disagree. You blame landlords, I blame poor giovernment policies.