3 ms·

> And it’s nonsensical that if you got rid of all of the investors who only own 2-3% of the supply, Either you are sealioning, or you genuinely can’t comprehen

by rekabis 9mo ago

> And it’s nonsensical that if you got rid of all of the investors who only own 2-3% of the supply, Either you are sealioning, or you genuinely can’t comprehend the written word. Time and time again you keep hammering on this point, which is only a tiny fraction of mine. You keep hammering on the window dressing, while I am addressing the real elephant in the room, THE OTHER ⅓ OF LANDLORDS, WHO ARE THE MAJORITY OF THE PROBLEM. I am talking about the other ≈30% of landlords ≈30%. Not 2-3%. ≈30%. That is the size of the problem. > Housing is very much elastic. For buyers and sellers, perhaps. For renters, NO. If rent was elastic, we wouldn’t have a “working poor” homeless problem. If rent was elastic, we wouldn’t have 23 empty homes for every homeless person. > are you also opposed to apartment complexes owned by investors? A single, separate, unrelated owner per apartment/unit? No. That generates genuine competition for renters. A single owner per complex? F*ck, yes. It’s an obscene concentration of economic power away from the renter and into the landlord’s hands. > As far as raw food, do you also think that people in the supply chain like farmers, packagers, food delivery drivers etc shouldn’t make a profit? My family have been orchardists for almost a half century. We know plenty of other farmers and orchardists. Most would rather let their food go to the hungry rather than let it rot on the tree or in the field. And yet, it takes capitalism and the Parasite Class to drench food in kerosine and light it aflame in order to generate artificial scarcity and keep profits high. And if you know anything about economic trends, you would know that food prices keep skyrocketing, yet the share that farmers get keeps shrinking. Where does it all go? To the middlemen, increasingly concentrated in a handful of suppliers that keep buying up all the competition, thereby concentrating profits in the hands of the ultra-wealthy Parasite Class. Even up here in Canada, it’s even getting such that the lines between middleman and retailer is blurring, with mega-corps such as Loblaws - which makes up a large majority of supermarkets - buying up distributors and processors in order to capture that middleman profit margin for themselves, denying the farmers higher returns and the consumer lower prices. Yay, capitalism? Because it’s neither the consumer nor the farmer who’s benefitting from capitalism. It’s the parasites at the top.

raw_anon_1111 9mo ago
> Either you are sealioning, or you genuinely can’t comprehend the written word. Time and time again you keep hammering on this point, which is only a tiny fraction of mine. You keep hammering on the window dressing, while I am addressing the real elephant in the room, THE OTHER ⅓ OF LANDLORDS, WHO ARE THE MAJORITY OF THE PROBLEM. What exactly is your point? For single homes, if only 2% of all homes being sold are owned by investors, releasing those would at most increase the supply by 2%. But it’s even crazier that you think apartment buildings shouldn’t be owned by corporations and centrally managed. Do you think individual owners will take care of maintenance, property taxes, collecting rent, a centrally managed tenant office erc? Funny enough, I have an idea of exactly how that would conceivably work. I mentioned before that my wife and I moved into a condo. I didn’t mention that it was a unit we own in a condotel (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/condotel.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/condotel.asp). Each unit is individually owned. But the complex itself is run like a hotel (not a timeshare). All of the owners but us use there unit as some combination of a second home and an investment property. When someone stays in a unit the owner gets half the income and the property manager gets the other half. To be clear, this is in central Florida close to Disney and it is zoned and was built as a hotel. Unless you are also opposed to corporations owning hotels You have to have central management for a large apartment complex just like for the condotel we live in. As far as farmers what do you suggest? Either every farmer distributes the food themselves across the country or everyone in the distribution chain does the work for free? BTW, my grandfather raised and sold pigs and cows most of his life and my uncle (his son) still takes care of the cattle. I don’t think he’s going to be killing and processing the meat himself. Should everyone between him selling the cows and it getting to shelves do it for free?
- rekabis 9mo ago
  > For single homes, if only 2% of all homes being sold are owned by investors, releasing those would at most increase the supply by 2%. For the last time, I AM NOT ONLY TALKING ABOUT CORPORATIONS. I am INCLUDING those INDEPENDENT INDIVIDUALS who are landlording AS A CAREER. Like, anyone who has bought any residence purely to rent out, and who has never lived in that residence. Who treat housing as an investment without actually being a corporation. THAT is what covers 30+% of the market. Release 30+% of that housing onto the market, and supply increases DRAMATICALLY. QUIT BEING A F*KING TROLL. > But it’s even crazier that you think apartment buildings shouldn’t be owned by corporations and centrally managed. >Do you think individual owners will take care of maintenance, property taxes, collecting rent, a centrally managed tenant office erc? Let me update you on this lovely little administrative structure called a STRATA COUNCIL. This covers a lot of what you just talked about. It’s a council of individual owners that make decisions about maintenance and changes to the common areas and overall physical building. The property taxes and rent are handled by the landlords, which is what the vast majority of landlords already do. > As far as farmers what do you suggest? Punitive taxation of corporate profit margins. This forces the middlemen to do one or more of three things: invest in the company (such as increased wages of workers, or better tooling, etc.), pay more for inputs, or charge less for outputs.
  - raw_anon_1111 9mo ago
    Okay, again, are you saying that no one should rent a home under any circumstances or that people who own homes should tie up their money and do it at cost? And again you are wrong. It’s not 30% of the market - it’s 3%. > Let me update you on this lovely little administrative structure called a STRATA COUNCIL… Guess what a group of owners who collective own and run something is called - a business On the other hand, there is an existence proof of what happens when a group of individuals run a group of units - look at the mess that is most condo associations in Florida where they don’t do upkeep and condo buildings are literally falling down. By the way, since most people don’t know how to run a business like an apartment complex or even a condo association where the units are individually owned, they still end up outsourcing the management to a property management organization as do most HOAs It’s clear that only one of us in this conversation knows about the real estate business…. Why would anyone invest their money in a company if not for profit?

by rekabis 9mo ago

raw_anon_1111 9mo ago

> Either you are sealioning, or you genuinely can’t comprehend the written word. Time and time again you keep hammering on this point, which is only a tiny fraction of mine. You keep hammering on the window dressing, while I am addressing the real elephant in the room, THE OTHER ⅓ OF LANDLORDS, WHO ARE THE MAJORITY OF THE PROBLEM. What exactly is your point? For single homes, if only 2% of all homes being sold are owned by investors, releasing those would at most increase the supply by 2%. But it’s even crazier that you think apartment buildings shouldn’t be owned by corporations and centrally managed. Do you think individual owners will take care of maintenance, property taxes, collecting rent, a centrally managed tenant office erc? Funny enough, I have an idea of exactly how that would conceivably work. I mentioned before that my wife and I moved into a condo. I didn’t mention that it was a unit we own in a condotel (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/condotel.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/condotel.asp). Each unit is individually owned. But the complex itself is run like a hotel (not a timeshare). All of the owners but us use there unit as some combination of a second home and an investment property. When someone stays in a unit the owner gets half the income and the property manager gets the other half. To be clear, this is in central Florida close to Disney and it is zoned and was built as a hotel. Unless you are also opposed to corporations owning hotels You have to have central management for a large apartment complex just like for the condotel we live in. As far as farmers what do you suggest? Either every farmer distributes the food themselves across the country or everyone in the distribution chain does the work for free? BTW, my grandfather raised and sold pigs and cows most of his life and my uncle (his son) still takes care of the cattle. I don’t think he’s going to be killing and processing the meat himself. Should everyone between him selling the cows and it getting to shelves do it for free?

rekabis 9mo ago
> For single homes, if only 2% of all homes being sold are owned by investors, releasing those would at most increase the supply by 2%. For the last time, I AM NOT ONLY TALKING ABOUT CORPORATIONS. I am INCLUDING those INDEPENDENT INDIVIDUALS who are landlording AS A CAREER. Like, anyone who has bought any residence purely to rent out, and who has never lived in that residence. Who treat housing as an investment without actually being a corporation. THAT is what covers 30+% of the market. Release 30+% of that housing onto the market, and supply increases DRAMATICALLY. QUIT BEING A F*KING TROLL. > But it’s even crazier that you think apartment buildings shouldn’t be owned by corporations and centrally managed. >Do you think individual owners will take care of maintenance, property taxes, collecting rent, a centrally managed tenant office erc? Let me update you on this lovely little administrative structure called a STRATA COUNCIL. This covers a lot of what you just talked about. It’s a council of individual owners that make decisions about maintenance and changes to the common areas and overall physical building. The property taxes and rent are handled by the landlords, which is what the vast majority of landlords already do. > As far as farmers what do you suggest? Punitive taxation of corporate profit margins. This forces the middlemen to do one or more of three things: invest in the company (such as increased wages of workers, or better tooling, etc.), pay more for inputs, or charge less for outputs.
- raw_anon_1111 9mo ago
  Okay, again, are you saying that no one should rent a home under any circumstances or that people who own homes should tie up their money and do it at cost? And again you are wrong. It’s not 30% of the market - it’s 3%. > Let me update you on this lovely little administrative structure called a STRATA COUNCIL… Guess what a group of owners who collective own and run something is called - a business On the other hand, there is an existence proof of what happens when a group of individuals run a group of units - look at the mess that is most condo associations in Florida where they don’t do upkeep and condo buildings are literally falling down. By the way, since most people don’t know how to run a business like an apartment complex or even a condo association where the units are individually owned, they still end up outsourcing the management to a property management organization as do most HOAs It’s clear that only one of us in this conversation knows about the real estate business…. Why would anyone invest their money in a company if not for profit?