4 ms·

We all know it’s just a big game of lies and charades in which the winners keep winning and control the message and the policies. Without renters there would b

• carlosjobim 1y ago
  Even without renters, most owners would prefer being house-poor rather than selling any extra houses they own.
  • dcow 1y ago
    House poor means you can’t afford to furnish the house you live in, not that real estate is your primary asset class.
    • carlosjobim 1y ago
      What I mean is that most owners would prefer to let their extra real estate rot away and become worthless rather than sell it and using that money for more profitable investments or a more comfortable life. I see it everywhere.
• sillystu04 1y ago
  > Without renters there would be no housing Ponzi scheme If by "housing Ponzi scheme" you mean house prices increasing then this isn't necessarily true. Even in a world where private renting was illegal and people were forced to choose between home ownership and homelessness, house prices could increase over time because of restricted supply, increased populated and wage growth.