10 ms·

It’s possible. Either way, many people literally sleep in a monthly subscription model — rent.

by mikasisiki 9mo ago

croes 9mo ago
Because buying a house is even more unaffordable.
zwnow 9mo ago
[flagged]
- forty 9mo ago
  I don't disagree, but I would argue that the same thing can be said from any kind of "investor" who then capture most of the value produced just because it turned out they had the money that others had not (most of the time just because they were born in the right family)
- cpursley 9mo ago
  [flagged]
  - zwnow 9mo ago
    > Landlord isn’t nearly as profitable as some people think. I am aware of that, still doesnt stop people from speculation and therefor preventing others from buying.
    - cpursley 9mo ago
      If you’re talking about the corporate landlords, yeah. But the real issue is we’re not creating enough housing of the correct type in the US (like missing middle). Only choices are either McMansions or “luxury” apartments that are made from cardboard.
  - Der_Einzige 9mo ago
    Stuff like this is unironically (okay, kind of ironically) why I identify as a landchad. https://www.reddit.com/r/LoveForLandchads/ https://www.reddit.com/r/LoveForLandchads/
- pc86 9mo ago
  You have that option, it's called buying a house and getting a mortgage. You just rent from the bank for 30 years first. But you're not thinking x=30 with any responsibility other than writing a check, I bet. If I had to guess, I'd say you want x<10 and you still don't want to pay for maintenance, or property taxes, or have the value reassessed as soon as you take occupancy, or be forced to stay there if you decide to leave. You want all the benefit with none of the cost or risk. It's fine to want that but let's not pretend "rent should be illegal" is a serious or reasonable policy proposal. There's a reason why a mortgage with very little down payment is a lot more than comparable rent.
  - zwnow 9mo ago
    > It's fine to want that but let's not pretend "rent should be illegal" is a serious or reasonable policy proposal. So its fine for you that there are people owning 20+ properties speculating on profit for basic human needs? Its literally Nestlé "this is MY water" behavior.
    - conductr 9mo ago
      Most people here are pro capitalism. It has flaws but you’re also being blind to its benefits. If 20 people need homes to live in and can’t afford to build them, suddenly landlords/investors have a place because they built housing inventory where others couldn’t. They won’t do that for free though and why should they. I remember your username from prior threads, you’re a troll man. Take this crap to Reddit.
      - testing22321 9mo ago
        Let them profit off commercial real estate, or a million other things that capitalism provides. The nestle statements about profiting off people’s need for drinking water were universally viewed as disgusting. We shouldn’t always profit off the basic needs of other humans.
        conductr 9mo ago
- conductr 9mo ago
  What does this say about tenants though? You expect someone to buy a home that you can’t afford, rent it to you until you can. Meanwhile, maintain it while you rent it, pay the property taxes and insurance as well, basically have a tiny cash flow off my investment-all to just be forced to sell it to you in the end when my only hope of getting ahead on this was some long term appreciation or the build up of equity. Spoiler, equity doesn’t usually build up very fast. Better chance of appreciation building up, but even that is a pretty big risk because you’re trying to time the market. I was a landlord for a bit and what I’ve found is that tenants that have probably never actually owned a property have no ideas about what it cost to own a property and what the landlord is actually making off your rent. Sure even if you pay a few thousand in rent, it may be the landlord only has a couple hundred of cash flow. Then, one repair on the home can easily wipe out a year or more of that. One bad tenants can wipe out a decade of it. I recall my worst tenants ever. Weren’t even that bad all things considered but the were dirty people. The house was filthy when they moved out. The walls and floors were coated in a grease like film. I had a no smoking policy in the lease but it was obvious they smoked and used the floor as an ashtray. There was a handful of other things that were just broken. Anyways it was a 4 bedroom house that was 2500 sf. I got a few quotes to paint and fix the list of little stuff. The cheapest quote I got was $15k but there was also a $20k and a $30k quote. I decided not to go after these people for the damages but I told them the long list of repairs and because of the condition and cost of repairing it all I would not return their deposit which was only about $2500. Anyway they completely lost it calling me a slumlord and how there’s no way they could have generated that much damage and reported me to the state and wanted to sue me but I don’t think they found a lawyer to take the case. They thought I was marking up all the repairs costs and scamming them. I just sent them all 3 quotes and told them I chose the lowest and wasn’t asking them to pay the excess (I knew it would just be a bad debt). But they went through every line item and said they knew what it cost to paint a house and it was overpriced. This is where the problem is. They’ve never owned a property, never hired a contractor or handyman so they actually have no idea what these things cost. And in my city, construction is booming and everything housing related does seem expensive but it is what it is. There’s no cheaper way to do it besides DIY. But my labor isn’t free either and I’d charge more for my time than the contractors do so that’s not really a solution either.
  - 9mo ago
Traubenfuchs 9mo ago
You still have to pay for utilities and taxes: No way to escape that unless you live in the wilderness.
- lotsofpulp 9mo ago
  “Rent” needs to better defined at this point. At least some portion of utilities and tax charges pay for ongoing maintenance and investment to provide expected quality of life. Similar to how rent for a home eventually pays for a new roof or other repairs. The profit margin component of rent is probably what most are referring to in this discussion, but presumably tax and (government owned) utilities don’t have that.
  - charcircuit 9mo ago
    Government utilities fo have a profit margin, they aren't a charity.
    - lotsofpulp 9mo ago
      This context is about a profit that gets distributed to shareholders, which obviously does not benefit the payer. Whatever "profit" a government owned utility earns is presumably, eventually re-invested into the utility eventually benefiting the payer.
- pepperball 9mo ago
  > No way to escape that unless you live in the wilderness. The wilderness is all owned. Trespassers will be prosecuted.
jrs235 9mo ago
That makes more sense though. Since one can't easily take a home with them (it's fixed to the ground), renting a dwelling provides flexibility and liquidity for life changing events.
- testing22321 9mo ago
  You might be interested to learn a huge percentage of people pay rent to sleep in a trailer park, where the houses very much have wheels.
  - vel0city 9mo ago
    Many of these people are in essentially double financialized situations, where they have a loan on the mobile home and they pay monthly pad fees to the trailer park.
lm28469 9mo ago
It's very cultural though, in eastern Europe you often have 80/90% of people living in a home they own.

It’s possible. Either way, many people literally sleep in a monthly subscription model — rent.

croes 9mo ago

Because buying a house is even more unaffordable.

zwnow 9mo ago

[flagged]

forty 9mo ago
I don't disagree, but I would argue that the same thing can be said from any kind of "investor" who then capture most of the value produced just because it turned out they had the money that others had not (most of the time just because they were born in the right family)
cpursley 9mo ago
[flagged]
- zwnow 9mo ago
  > Landlord isn’t nearly as profitable as some people think. I am aware of that, still doesnt stop people from speculation and therefor preventing others from buying.
  - cpursley 9mo ago
    If you’re talking about the corporate landlords, yeah. But the real issue is we’re not creating enough housing of the correct type in the US (like missing middle). Only choices are either McMansions or “luxury” apartments that are made from cardboard.
- Der_Einzige 9mo ago
  Stuff like this is unironically (okay, kind of ironically) why I identify as a landchad. https://www.reddit.com/r/LoveForLandchads/ https://www.reddit.com/r/LoveForLandchads/
pc86 9mo ago
You have that option, it's called buying a house and getting a mortgage. You just rent from the bank for 30 years first. But you're not thinking x=30 with any responsibility other than writing a check, I bet. If I had to guess, I'd say you want x<10 and you still don't want to pay for maintenance, or property taxes, or have the value reassessed as soon as you take occupancy, or be forced to stay there if you decide to leave. You want all the benefit with none of the cost or risk. It's fine to want that but let's not pretend "rent should be illegal" is a serious or reasonable policy proposal. There's a reason why a mortgage with very little down payment is a lot more than comparable rent.
- zwnow 9mo ago
  > It's fine to want that but let's not pretend "rent should be illegal" is a serious or reasonable policy proposal. So its fine for you that there are people owning 20+ properties speculating on profit for basic human needs? Its literally Nestlé "this is MY water" behavior.
  - conductr 9mo ago
    Most people here are pro capitalism. It has flaws but you’re also being blind to its benefits. If 20 people need homes to live in and can’t afford to build them, suddenly landlords/investors have a place because they built housing inventory where others couldn’t. They won’t do that for free though and why should they. I remember your username from prior threads, you’re a troll man. Take this crap to Reddit.
    - testing22321 9mo ago
      Let them profit off commercial real estate, or a million other things that capitalism provides. The nestle statements about profiting off people’s need for drinking water were universally viewed as disgusting. We shouldn’t always profit off the basic needs of other humans.
      - conductr 9mo ago
conductr 9mo ago
What does this say about tenants though? You expect someone to buy a home that you can’t afford, rent it to you until you can. Meanwhile, maintain it while you rent it, pay the property taxes and insurance as well, basically have a tiny cash flow off my investment-all to just be forced to sell it to you in the end when my only hope of getting ahead on this was some long term appreciation or the build up of equity. Spoiler, equity doesn’t usually build up very fast. Better chance of appreciation building up, but even that is a pretty big risk because you’re trying to time the market. I was a landlord for a bit and what I’ve found is that tenants that have probably never actually owned a property have no ideas about what it cost to own a property and what the landlord is actually making off your rent. Sure even if you pay a few thousand in rent, it may be the landlord only has a couple hundred of cash flow. Then, one repair on the home can easily wipe out a year or more of that. One bad tenants can wipe out a decade of it. I recall my worst tenants ever. Weren’t even that bad all things considered but the were dirty people. The house was filthy when they moved out. The walls and floors were coated in a grease like film. I had a no smoking policy in the lease but it was obvious they smoked and used the floor as an ashtray. There was a handful of other things that were just broken. Anyways it was a 4 bedroom house that was 2500 sf. I got a few quotes to paint and fix the list of little stuff. The cheapest quote I got was $15k but there was also a $20k and a $30k quote. I decided not to go after these people for the damages but I told them the long list of repairs and because of the condition and cost of repairing it all I would not return their deposit which was only about $2500. Anyway they completely lost it calling me a slumlord and how there’s no way they could have generated that much damage and reported me to the state and wanted to sue me but I don’t think they found a lawyer to take the case. They thought I was marking up all the repairs costs and scamming them. I just sent them all 3 quotes and told them I chose the lowest and wasn’t asking them to pay the excess (I knew it would just be a bad debt). But they went through every line item and said they knew what it cost to paint a house and it was overpriced. This is where the problem is. They’ve never owned a property, never hired a contractor or handyman so they actually have no idea what these things cost. And in my city, construction is booming and everything housing related does seem expensive but it is what it is. There’s no cheaper way to do it besides DIY. But my labor isn’t free either and I’d charge more for my time than the contractors do so that’s not really a solution either.
- 9mo ago

Traubenfuchs 9mo ago

You still have to pay for utilities and taxes: No way to escape that unless you live in the wilderness.

lotsofpulp 9mo ago
“Rent” needs to better defined at this point. At least some portion of utilities and tax charges pay for ongoing maintenance and investment to provide expected quality of life. Similar to how rent for a home eventually pays for a new roof or other repairs. The profit margin component of rent is probably what most are referring to in this discussion, but presumably tax and (government owned) utilities don’t have that.
- charcircuit 9mo ago
  Government utilities fo have a profit margin, they aren't a charity.
  - lotsofpulp 9mo ago
    This context is about a profit that gets distributed to shareholders, which obviously does not benefit the payer. Whatever "profit" a government owned utility earns is presumably, eventually re-invested into the utility eventually benefiting the payer.
pepperball 9mo ago
> No way to escape that unless you live in the wilderness. The wilderness is all owned. Trespassers will be prosecuted.

jrs235 9mo ago

That makes more sense though. Since one can't easily take a home with them (it's fixed to the ground), renting a dwelling provides flexibility and liquidity for life changing events.

testing22321 9mo ago
You might be interested to learn a huge percentage of people pay rent to sleep in a trailer park, where the houses very much have wheels.
- vel0city 9mo ago
  Many of these people are in essentially double financialized situations, where they have a loan on the mobile home and they pay monthly pad fees to the trailer park.

lm28469 9mo ago

It's very cultural though, in eastern Europe you often have 80/90% of people living in a home they own.