|
Christoph posted:Look back at my first post on this whole subject. I said that illegalizing removing people after their contract expires would be harder on small landlords than it is on big developers. And look at the responses - which are "removing people for no reason just because a contract expired is even harder on the people who rent, who, interestingly, are often even less privileged than either the big or the small owner." The hardship resolved for the tenant outweighs the little bit of new hardship for the landowner, big or small.
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2019 21:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 17:10 |
|
|
"this stable customer wants to keep giving me business, wtf why can't I force them to stop" is peak capitalism lmao
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2019 21:38
|
|
|
Javid posted:Good news! You can stop being a landlord right now if you don't like the job! Apparently not. If I rent out a room for a year I'd better be prepared to rent it out forever.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2019 21:40
|
|
|
It seems like people complaining about property management from the perspective of small landlords are just so close to getting it. Like, yeah properly done property management is actually hard! Like full time job hard! Not something your relegate a few hours to after your own 40 hour a week job + commute and taking the kids to soccer practice or whatever. Like, perhaps something that should be managed by a large agency with people who specialize in it. Maybe it could be a government agency and be federally funded? I dunno just spitballin' here.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2019 21:40
|
|
|
You see me arguing against public housing? But is that the bill we're talking about? Nope. Let's loving get that bill in front of Kate Brown and see what she does.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2019 21:42
|
|
|
Christoph posted:Apparently not. If I rent out a room for a year I'd better be prepared to rent it out forever. Sell house, tenant agreement included, buy other house, don't rent parts of it out, problem solved!
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2019 21:43
|
|
|
Christoph posted:You see me arguing against public housing? Oh so you're a big supporter of public housing but you think that in the meantime the people making due with the lovely existing system should be at the whim of fickle lovely landlords? Your position really loving sucks dude.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2019 21:45
|
|
|
DrNutt posted:Oh so you're a big supporter of public housing but you think that in the meantime the people making due with the lovely existing system should be at the whim of fickle lovely landlords? Your position really loving sucks dude. Sorry for staying on the subject of the law in question rather than just saying kill the landlords, free housing look at how leftist I am. Javid posted:Sell house, tenant agreement included, buy other house, don't rent parts of it out, problem solved! We'd have to change the law there, too, because if I remember right selling is currently considered cause to evict.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2019 21:48
|
|
|
Christoph posted:You see me arguing against public housing?
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2019 21:49
|
|
|
Christoph posted:Sorry for staying on the subject of the law in question rather than just saying kill the landlords, free housing look at how leftist I am. twodot posted:If your stance is that we need no cause eviction to avoid inconveniencing small land lords, I've got really bad news regarding a well funded public housing initiative. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2019 21:51
|
|
|
Public housing would make homes less expensive all around, right? Because if that were the case, and public housing was real and in place here in the US, people could buy a house with an ordinary 40-hour job's pay, rather than getting involved in buying rental properties as part of a larger equity-building strategy. And that would be great. It would be loving awesome to just work and buy a house outright, rather than (for example) having to use a duplex's potential rental income as part of the calculation in qualifying for a loan because home prices are through the roof. I'm totally for that. Yes to public housing, which is not at all a proposed bill at the moment but should be.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2019 21:59
|
|
|
Christoph posted:Sorry for staying on the subject of the law in question rather than just saying kill the landlords, free housing look at how leftist I am. Lacking a coherent argument in favor of no cause eviction you have decided to equate it to murder. Good job.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2019 22:01
|
|
|
Hey christoph/whoever, feel free to answer the very easy question that's been softballed at you like three timesJavid posted:Please clarify why it's so vital to your livelihood that you not need a justifiable reason to strip people of their housing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2019 22:07
|
|
|
Christoph posted:Yeah. Really there should probably be a separate set of laws for people who own a small number of rental units versus megacorporations who build loving hives like they have on the south waterfront in Portland. Joe Blow who rents out his basement or even bought a triplex isn't the mastermind behind the housing crisis and he has what I would say a pretty legit claim to property rights in the case of wanting to control a space after a contract expires. Individual investors make up like 75% of rental properties, the problem is definitely in large part caused by "Joe Blow" slumlord. Also lol at "Just buy a house" as if everyone renting is doing it because they love it so much.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2019 22:35
|
|
|
therobit posted:Please justify why you think you have a right to someone else's property beyond the scope of the contract you sign with them regarding said property. Utility. Society comes with strings. They're needed for it to run well. The system empowers you to be how people acquire shelter? Okay, like it or not, that's an important position of responsibility. There's going to be impact fees on your new apartment buildings. There's going to be regulations about fire alarms. There's going to be minimum housing requirements. All kinds of poo poo. You do not exist in an abstract void. You are your tenant are not two fur traders standing in the middle of the woods in the year 6. There are rules that have to be followed so that this works out well enough. Alternatively, pitch forks. Beware of feeling entitled to endlessly tighten the screws. The lives of others are real. And you sound soft and whiny.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 00:36
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:Utility. Society comes with strings. They're needed for it to run well. I appreciate your take. I'm willing to bet that I agree with 99% of everyone's politics here. Asking or forcing someone out of a living space is not something to be taken lightly. This is complicated gray area stuff. I think it's also worth mentioning in this discussion that operating a rental (be it an ADU, having a roommate who pays you rent, or buying a duplex and renting out the other side) is one of the few relatively secure paths to homeownership left for Millenials, at least in expensive-rear end places like PDX. Tightening the screws on operating rentals could dissuade people from using one of the few methods left for building equity. It sucks. It also sucks for people whose contracts run out. This is nuanced and there's not an easy airtight ethical position. I do think the whole system needs to be revamped (see my above post regarding public housing).
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 01:21
|
|
|
Less parasites buying up housing to wring income out of it means more housing for sale for human beings to live in. Also, answer the question.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 01:27
|
|
|
A guy I know who is on disability and section 8 housing is getting kicked out of a place he's rented for 30 years because they want to stop being section 8 and rent to amazon employees for way more money, clearly he should have just signed a 40 year lease so he couldn't be no cause evicted
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 01:38
|
|
|
Javid posted:Also, answer the question. Is vital tipp be able to enforce the expiration of a contract because costs of repairs, taxes, utilities and the like are not always tied to whatever specified maximum rent increase is allowed by that bill, and also because it is private property and if you want to quot renting it, you should have that right.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 01:48
|
|
|
therobit posted:Is vital tipp be able to enforce the expiration of a contract because costs of repairs, taxes, utilities and the like are not always tied to whatever specified maximum rent increase is allowed by that bill, and also because it is private property and if you want to quot renting it, you should have that right. Nice ragepost, do you understand the question?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 01:51
|
|
|
It's wild that we got here because a landlord doesn't want to be able to use no-cause eviction to evict people for cause. Also I can't believe how many tepid, head-in-the-sand takes are happening here. Like the classic "stop saying landlords are parasites and they'll magically vote in your interest instead of theirs" or "I probably agree with 99% of your politics but I'd rather evict a family than extract suboptimal wealth from them". I think Javid keeps raising the most important point, which is that most people have no choice but to rent whereas landlords always have the choice to walk away. George fucked around with this message at 22:42 on Feb 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 02:09
|
|
|
It's called rent-seeking behavior for a reason
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 02:17
|
|
|
Javid posted:Nice ragepost, do you understand the question? I'm not actually angry, friend. We will never agree on this, because you believe in socialism and I believe in more expansive view of property rights than is allowable under socialism. Socialists view property owners as enemies in a class struggle. I don't really think I am participating in a class struggle because that's not the lens with which I view the world. I don't want to keep anyone down, but I also don't think you should try to restrict my property rights by telling me I have to rent to someone in perpetuity. I have considered your positions and arguments in the past, but I just don't agree with them. I think the poster who was talking about a crab bucket mentality was right. My dad was a janitor when I was growing up, and I was on government assistance (wic) when my children were born. I think government programs to help the poor are great and I support them. I'm also benefiting from a capitalist system because I'm willing to participate in it and I also think that's great. I get that you all disagree strongly and think anyone with that view is poo poo, but I think both are reasonable positions for someone to espouse. If voters agree with you more than me, you'll get what you want. Honestly, I would rather spend time and energy finding common ground on things like race relations, reparations for slavery, prison reform, and immigration policy than fighting about rent control and evictions. If I can't count on ending a rental contract at its expiration, I'll just make sure I charge more on the front end and inspect a lot more often, as well as being way pickier with who I rent to in the first place. I'm not sure that will have the effect you desire, but I bet it is what a lot of landlords will do.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 02:25
|
|
|
therobit posted:I don't really think I am participating in a class struggle because that's not the lens with which I view the world. [...] I'll just make sure I charge more on the front end and inspect a lot more often, as well as being way pickier with who I rent to in the first place. I'm not sure that will have the effect you desire, but I bet it is what a lot of landlords will do. edit: Like how in the world do you expect people to react to that? "You can't seek protections for tenants to not be arbitrarily removed from their homes, because if you do landlords will retaliate in a way that makes the situation net-negative, also there is definitely not a class struggle between tenants and landlords, that's all in your heads" twodot fucked around with this message at 02:39 on Feb 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 02:31
|
|
|
twodot posted:You're not participating in a class struggle, but if tenants seek protection from being removed from their homes for no reason you will retaliate against tenants? It's not retaliation, it's making sure the investment is still productive relative to its risk. Rental property is an active investment that requires input of money, time, and labor. Due to that, and due to the risk of a single bad tenant wiping years of returns in a single rental period, I want to be making a higher return than I would in say a mutual fund.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 02:40
|
|
|
therobit posted:It's not retaliation, it's making sure the investment is still productive relative to its risk. Rental property is an active investment that requires input of money, time, and labor. Due to that, and due to the risk of a single bad tenant wiping years of returns in a single rental period, I want to be making a higher return than I would in say a mutual fund. edit: Like the proposal is straight up: "If someone isn't causing you problems they will pay you money forever, if they are causing problems you can still kick them out for causing problems" and that makes your investment worse? twodot fucked around with this message at 02:48 on Feb 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 02:44
|
|
|
twodot posted:And not being able to kick people out of their homes for literally no reason changes that equation how? If you are capping my ability to raise rent at the same time, and also make it so if I want to sell it has to come with the tenants, then yes it impacts the calculation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 02:51
|
|
|
therobit posted:If you are capping my ability to raise rent at the same time, and also make it so if I want to sell it has to come with the tenants, then yes it impacts the calculation. twodot fucked around with this message at 02:59 on Feb 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 02:53
|
|
|
Still waiting for an actual straight answer. Under what circumstances is it absolutely vital to your life to forcibly remove someone from a rental they are paying for and not damaging in any way? You keep acting like this tangibly harms you but dance around actually quantifying how that happens.therobit posted:If you are capping my ability to raise rent at the same time, and also make it so if I want to sell it has to come with the tenants, then yes it impacts the calculation. Then don't rent out property. What part of that simple flow chart is troubling you?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 02:55
|
|
|
therobit posted:Is vital tipp be able to enforce the expiration of a contract because costs of repairs, taxes, utilities and the like are not always tied to whatever specified maximum rent increase is allowed by that bill, and also because it is private property and if you want to quot renting it, you should have that right. Didn’t we already cover that there are protections for landlords in all the cases you’ve listed? You’re allowed to charge your tenant for utilities, increase rent to cover tax increases, and even evict tenants to do major repairs. If you want to quit renting you can sell the property or move in yourself or one of your family members. But also private property stops being just “private” when you start leasing it to someone. Once you decide to make money with that property you have to adhere to rules and regulations because that’s the price of operating a business in society.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 03:09
|
|
|
Javid posted:Still waiting for an actual straight answer. Under what circumstances is it absolutely vital to your life to forcibly remove someone from a rental they are paying for and not damaging in any way? You keep acting like this tangibly harms you but dance around actually quantifying how that happens. You keep acting like it's a given that rental property is a no risk investment and that people will never need to get their capital back out or do something different with the property. That just isn't true. I see it as an investment and if it doesn't pencil I will either charge more or sell it to another people who can afford to but it, and it will be one less rental unit out there to rent. We're not going to agree, because we have a different set of base assumptions. You vote for people who will put in rent controls, I'll vote for people who won't, and at the end of the day one of its will win (from the sound of it, maybe that's you), but I'm not gonna be mad at you over a difference of opinion on this matter. I am, frankly, just happy to have not been probated over it yet. And I'm happier over the democratic majority in Oregon that will hopefully be doing other important work than I am upset about this over policy I don't like.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 03:10
|
|
|
It's not an "investment", it's the lives and shelter of human beings. This is the thing you seem to not be getting: it's not all about you.Javid posted:Under what circumstances is it absolutely vital to your life to forcibly remove someone from a rental they are paying for and not damaging in any way? It sounds like your answer is "because my dollars" which is exactly the kind of actively harmful behavior that makes finding a god drat rental a nightmare and causes these laws to be necessary. "we have a different set of base assumptions" sure, in that most of the thread seems to agree that humans are more important than money, and you apparently don't. If you think that's fine and normal then why are you hiding it in big rear end paragraphs of excuses when I try to get an actual straight answer? Because it just looks like you know, and don't care, that attitudes like yours ruin lives.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 03:20
|
|
|
therobit posted:...and it will be one less rental unit out there to rent. How do you not get that owning two houses and renting one out does not improve the overall affordability of housing for ANYBODY versus selling down to one? All it does is allow you to extract revenue from the housing market. That's what rent-seeking is.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 03:35
|
|
|
So what is this thread's rentier class thoughts on profit seeking in the healthcare sector Or is medical care different than housing for some reason
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 03:36
|
|
|
Javid posted:It's not an "investment", it's the lives and shelter of human beings. This is the thing you seem to not be getting: it's not all about you. This, if you own more homes than you can live in at once the decent things to do are either rent it at a fair rate to cover expenses, sell it, or give it to someone. e: Unoriginal Name posted:So what is this thread's rentier class thoughts on profit seeking in the healthcare sector "promote the general welfare" is in the preamble of the constitution of the United States so I don't think healthcare should be privatized. Shifty Nipples fucked around with this message at 03:42 on Feb 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 03:38
|
|
|
If a mod gasses this thread is that no-cause or for-cause eviction of everyone that thought they had posting rights in perpetuity ITT? Lowtax is an internet property owner and the mods are enabling him to continue extracting 10bux 
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 05:16
|
|
|
idk, it seems to be what people feel like talking about and nobody's getting too lovely. The topic seems to have wrung itself out anyway, so who cares?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 06:15
|
|
|
therobit posted:It's not retaliation, it's making sure the investment is still productive relative to its risk. An inherent conflict of interest. How do you reconcile that with: quote:I don't really think I am participating in a class struggle The class divides/conflicts simply come out of the woodwork (and are worth mitigating). And you're downstream from the same poo poo. Why do you think the EPA exists? Or health inspectors? There's always someone pouting to the tune of, "it's my property, whatever happened to property rights." We all abide by rules and we all benefit. We live in a society. Order's important. Go stress-eat some clean food.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 06:31
|
|
|
Gerund posted:The petite bourgeois landlord in a 100% real and totally not massaged example is still actively participating in class war despite being admittedly bad at it and morally repugnant. I am always very suspicious of people who claim to believe in the same policies as I do but then threaten to not vote for them because their feelings got hurt. Bernie Sanders could personally come to my apartment and call me a dumb fuckface but that doesn't mean I would go "Well, I'm a capitalist now!" It comes off as very much like a husband asking his wife why she made him hit her. Gosh, I wanted to do the right thing but then you made me vote against the policies I allegedly believe in. This is on you! I never buy it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2019 18:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 17:10 |
|
|
1glitch0 posted:I am always very suspicious of people who claim to believe in the same policies as I do but then threaten to not vote for them because their feelings got hurt. Bernie Sanders could personally come to my apartment and call me a dumb fuckface but that doesn't mean I would go "Well, I'm a capitalist now!" It comes off as very much like a husband asking his wife why she made him hit her. Gosh, I wanted to do the right thing but then you made me vote against the policies I allegedly believe in. This is on you! I never buy it. Same with folks who vote third party in the general.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 00:44
|
|
