4 ms·

Sounds like a great tool. But it's sad that it needs to exist.

grafmax 1y ago
Our society prioritizes the narrow interests of rentier capitalists over the working class. Unfortunately this means the US is losing international competitiveness across more and more industries. For one thing rent extraction ultimately gets financed by employers through higher wages, thus productive business loses out to business from a region like China where costs of employment are lower. Rather than making economies more efficient like productive business is supposed to do, rentier capitalism means cash flows from the debtor to the creditor class, which forms a feedback loop as the creditor class is able to use this cash to buy more assets and extract more rent simply by expanding its circle of ownership.
- bpt3 1y ago
  Real estate prices are controlled by supply and demand. If you want a lower cost of living than desirable places in the US, alternatives (like China, or the Rust Belt) exist. And if you think housing prices are bad in the US, you should look at the rest of the developed world.
SilverElfin 1y ago
Yep. A lot of these regulations end up hurting small landlords because only corporate landlords with a large number of units can comply easily and absorb costs of bad tenants.
bpt3 1y ago
Sad in what way? Renters will always exist, and some will be unable or unwilling to adhere to the contract they signed. Like all contracts, there are penalities for non-compliance (on both sides).
- grafmax 1y ago
  These leases generally are not a contract between equals. One party owns extra housing. The other owns none and gets charged for this fact. It’s institutionalized exploitation. Legal, sure. People being unable to pay for a basic necessity while others have so much that they can profit off it - its not unreasonable to call this “sad”.
  - bpt3 1y ago
    Everyone pays for shelter in some form or fashion, and many people do not want to and/or should not own their own home. It's not considered exploitative to charge for groceries, clothing, or other necessities, so why is housing seen differently by some?
    - grafmax 1y ago
      Groceries and other necessities are produced. Rent and mortgage payments are based on selling access to resources - nothing of value is produced through rent extraction. It is a purely parasitic process economically. There is indeed a case to be made for universal access to basic necessities but the case against rent extraction is more basic than that. To your point about people preferring renting to owning who have the option of both, I am not directing my argument against this case but the general case instead - most people do not have the option of affording housing except through the rentier capitalist avenues of rent or mortgage. It is these people who are being parasitized by this form of economic activity.
      - bpt3 1y ago
        > Rent and mortgage payments are based on selling access to resources - nothing of value is produced through rent extraction. It is a purely parasitic process economically. I have to assume you have never been responsible for maintaining a property. Unless someone is renting out a cave on a triple net lease, your statement above is hilariously inaccurate. > most people do not have the option of affording housing except through the rentier capitalist avenues of rent or mortgage. If most people can't afford it, then why do most people live in a home that is owned by a member of their household (either themselves, or their parent/guardian)?

Our society prioritizes the narrow interests of rentier capitalists over the working class. Unfortunately this means the US is losing international competitiveness across more and more industries. For one thing rent extraction ultimately gets financed by employers through higher wages, thus productive business loses out to business from a region like China where costs of employment are lower. Rather than making economies more efficient like productive business is supposed to do, rentier capitalism means cash flows from the debtor to the creditor class, which forms a feedback loop as the creditor class is able to use this cash to buy more assets and extract more rent simply by expanding its circle of ownership.

bpt3 1y ago
Real estate prices are controlled by supply and demand. If you want a lower cost of living than desirable places in the US, alternatives (like China, or the Rust Belt) exist. And if you think housing prices are bad in the US, you should look at the rest of the developed world.

SilverElfin 1y ago

Yep. A lot of these regulations end up hurting small landlords because only corporate landlords with a large number of units can comply easily and absorb costs of bad tenants.

bpt3 1y ago

Sad in what way? Renters will always exist, and some will be unable or unwilling to adhere to the contract they signed. Like all contracts, there are penalities for non-compliance (on both sides).

grafmax 1y ago
These leases generally are not a contract between equals. One party owns extra housing. The other owns none and gets charged for this fact. It’s institutionalized exploitation. Legal, sure. People being unable to pay for a basic necessity while others have so much that they can profit off it - its not unreasonable to call this “sad”.
- bpt3 1y ago
  Everyone pays for shelter in some form or fashion, and many people do not want to and/or should not own their own home. It's not considered exploitative to charge for groceries, clothing, or other necessities, so why is housing seen differently by some?
  - grafmax 1y ago
    Groceries and other necessities are produced. Rent and mortgage payments are based on selling access to resources - nothing of value is produced through rent extraction. It is a purely parasitic process economically. There is indeed a case to be made for universal access to basic necessities but the case against rent extraction is more basic than that. To your point about people preferring renting to owning who have the option of both, I am not directing my argument against this case but the general case instead - most people do not have the option of affording housing except through the rentier capitalist avenues of rent or mortgage. It is these people who are being parasitized by this form of economic activity.
    - bpt3 1y ago
      > Rent and mortgage payments are based on selling access to resources - nothing of value is produced through rent extraction. It is a purely parasitic process economically. I have to assume you have never been responsible for maintaining a property. Unless someone is renting out a cave on a triple net lease, your statement above is hilariously inaccurate. > most people do not have the option of affording housing except through the rentier capitalist avenues of rent or mortgage. If most people can't afford it, then why do most people live in a home that is owned by a member of their household (either themselves, or their parent/guardian)?