4 ms·

I really don't understand the anti-landlord sentiment. Folks seem to get this idea that your average landlord has no costs, takes on no risk, and just sails awa

I really don't understand the anti-landlord sentiment. Folks seem to get this idea that your average landlord has no costs, takes on no risk, and just sails away with the rent they collect every month and spend it on a lavish vacation. Newsflash but buying property introduces significant costs, complexity and risk. By renting you simply choose to pay a monthly fee to a business that will provide you that same property but will take on all that risk instead of you.

kardos 2y ago
Things like this juice the anti-landlord sentiment: https://www.propublica.org/article/justice-department-sues-landlords-alleged-price-fixing-realpage-rent https://www.propublica.org/article/justice-department-sues-l...
claudiulodro 2y ago
> By renting you simply choose to pay a monthly fee to a business that will provide you that same property but will take on all that risk instead of you. I think the issue is that for many people it's not much of a choice since they can't afford to buy housing. It's pay a landlord or be homeless, and some form of shelter is necessary for humans.
knuckleheads 2y ago
I ask sincerely, have you ever had a bad landlord? Because if you had, you would understand why some people would hate them. Many people do not have the choice to buy a home and so must rent, and often they have to deal with terrible people.
- javagram 2y ago
  So they would rather be homeless? In a market without landlords, everyone who couldn’t afford to buy a home would have to live in their car or camp on the street.
  - geoffpado 2y ago
    In a market without landlords, especially corporate landlords, more people would be able to afford to buy a home.
  - JohnFen 2y ago
    I think that what most people want isn't a market without landlords, but a market without abusive landlords.
taurath 2y ago
The idea is that the person pockets a portion of the money that you make, where if you had the capital you’d be able to pocket the money. As rent increases, a mortgage doesn’t, and rent hasn’t decreased anywhere in a while, so the gap keeps getting larger. There are advantages to renting, but the “choice” of renting vs buying is a privilege afforded to fewer and fewer. There used to be starter homes, but there is a massive difference nowadays between those who own property and those who don’t, and it’s gotten increasingly more difficult over the last 30 years to buy into property on most peoples incomes. This functionally means that property ownership is often the line between economic classes. Not to mention the corporate landlords who algorithmically raise rents as much as possible while providing as little maintenance as possible.
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  All of those problems go away if you have sufficient supply of new housing.
  - dttze 2y ago
    And all my problems would go away if I found a pot of gold. Sadly, neither of these things will happen.
    - s1artibartfast 2y ago
      Not with that attitude. Lack of housing isn't a law of physics, It is a policy and social choice. There are many places with abundant housing, including places with high demand and good jobs. There are cities all over the world that grow, build affordable urban apartments, and build starter homes. You don't even have to look that hard for examples.
  - bradlys 2y ago
    There are places not experiencing a housing shortage that are still seeing rents go up. When a sizable portion of the landed gentry decide to band together to do price fixing, supply doesn’t matter. Supply and demand don’t follow closely in the American market. There is a lot of collusion happening.
ineptech 2y ago
Landlords are easy to hate in the way that people complain about Microsoft or their power utility or whatever, but the specific meme you're talking about (that they take no risk and live extravagantly without contributing anything) seems to have gotten very prominent relatively recently. Some of the specific complaints are wrong (landlords do take risk and some of them don't make much money) but the general sentiment is fair, in the sense that they get more return for less risk than they used to historically. It seems like an unavoidable response to rising inequality caused by capital getting most of the productivity gains over the last 40-odd years.

kardos 2y ago

Things like this juice the anti-landlord sentiment: https://www.propublica.org/article/justice-department-sues-landlords-alleged-price-fixing-realpage-rent https://www.propublica.org/article/justice-department-sues-l...

claudiulodro 2y ago

> By renting you simply choose to pay a monthly fee to a business that will provide you that same property but will take on all that risk instead of you. I think the issue is that for many people it's not much of a choice since they can't afford to buy housing. It's pay a landlord or be homeless, and some form of shelter is necessary for humans.

knuckleheads 2y ago

I ask sincerely, have you ever had a bad landlord? Because if you had, you would understand why some people would hate them. Many people do not have the choice to buy a home and so must rent, and often they have to deal with terrible people.

javagram 2y ago
So they would rather be homeless? In a market without landlords, everyone who couldn’t afford to buy a home would have to live in their car or camp on the street.
- geoffpado 2y ago
  In a market without landlords, especially corporate landlords, more people would be able to afford to buy a home.
- JohnFen 2y ago
  I think that what most people want isn't a market without landlords, but a market without abusive landlords.

taurath 2y ago

The idea is that the person pockets a portion of the money that you make, where if you had the capital you’d be able to pocket the money. As rent increases, a mortgage doesn’t, and rent hasn’t decreased anywhere in a while, so the gap keeps getting larger. There are advantages to renting, but the “choice” of renting vs buying is a privilege afforded to fewer and fewer. There used to be starter homes, but there is a massive difference nowadays between those who own property and those who don’t, and it’s gotten increasingly more difficult over the last 30 years to buy into property on most peoples incomes. This functionally means that property ownership is often the line between economic classes. Not to mention the corporate landlords who algorithmically raise rents as much as possible while providing as little maintenance as possible.

s1artibartfast 2y ago
All of those problems go away if you have sufficient supply of new housing.
- dttze 2y ago
  And all my problems would go away if I found a pot of gold. Sadly, neither of these things will happen.
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    Not with that attitude. Lack of housing isn't a law of physics, It is a policy and social choice. There are many places with abundant housing, including places with high demand and good jobs. There are cities all over the world that grow, build affordable urban apartments, and build starter homes. You don't even have to look that hard for examples.
- bradlys 2y ago
  There are places not experiencing a housing shortage that are still seeing rents go up. When a sizable portion of the landed gentry decide to band together to do price fixing, supply doesn’t matter. Supply and demand don’t follow closely in the American market. There is a lot of collusion happening.

ineptech 2y ago

Landlords are easy to hate in the way that people complain about Microsoft or their power utility or whatever, but the specific meme you're talking about (that they take no risk and live extravagantly without contributing anything) seems to have gotten very prominent relatively recently. Some of the specific complaints are wrong (landlords do take risk and some of them don't make much money) but the general sentiment is fair, in the sense that they get more return for less risk than they used to historically. It seems like an unavoidable response to rising inequality caused by capital getting most of the productivity gains over the last 40-odd years.