3 ms·
Why could #2 not be true? (The generous interpretation here would be, that costs around a building are complex, running costs and depreciation are often invisib
by jstummbillig 3y ago
Why could #2 not be true? (The generous interpretation here would be, that costs around a building are complex, running costs and depreciation are often invisible for long periods of time, factoring them in correctly is hard, and foresight is not our strong suite)
- hef19898 3y agoBecause all those other costs are calculated into the rent? And if not, they quite often allow a landlord to simply increase the rent.
- jstummbillig 3y agoSure, if done correctly. I tried to make a case for why that might not be trivial. All it requires is a reasonably incompetent owners, that are as bad with foresight, as most humans, companies and even states are. The point is: It's easy to ignore costs that might get you in 50 years, because it makes stuff simpler now, and making stuff simple now is our thing.
- hef19898 3y agoYou probably find one idiot landlord, sure. In general so, landlords are in the business of being a landlord for making money. And guess what, they do! Because the only people stupid enough to get maths behind renting and real estate ownership are those who try tell you that renting instead of buyong makea you rich one day.