|
we have a vast inventory of empty housing units the problem is that if you try to use one, a bunch of guys in blue uniforms will use violence to remove you from them.
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 19:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:58 |
|
|
Ruzihm posted:we have a vast inventory of empty houses. Maybe in some areas, but anyway that doesn't really have much to do with landlords.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 19:27
|
|
|
It's pretty clear that the thread invaders aren't interested in solving problems. They just want to stir up poo poo and get angry at someone. So hey, good job! You accomplished your goal!  Oh, and they gave me a new avatar. Why don't you spend that money on rent?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 19:28
|
|
|
Thermopyle posted:Maybe in some areas, but anyway that doesn't really have much to do with landlords. landlords are the ones telling the blue outfit people to use the violence v because it's the option that maximizes their long term expectation of profit
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 19:28
|
|
|
Ruzihm posted:landlords are the ones telling the blue outfit people to use the violence why would landlords own homes and leave them empty to the point that there are "vast" numbers of them
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 19:28
|
|
|
Thermopyle posted:why would landlords own homes and leave them empty to the point that there are "vast" numbers of them Who do you think would be first to complain if the unused housing was made available to those without homes? Maybe the group profiting off renting their housing to those without, yeah? Look, the landlord hatred is coming from somewhere. You can chalk it up to jealousy or ignorance if you want, but I think it's worth some introspection. "Am I justified in asking for this rental amount based on the work I've put into the situation, yes/no?" If the answer is yes, great! If it's no, lower rent until you you aren't exploiting anyone. I sleep fine at night asking for rent because I built my rental spaces with my own hands. I keep it low, never raise rents on a tenant, and give December discounts and would be willing to work with a tenant in financial trouble (temporarily at least). It's a power imbalance, be responsible with it. Those landlords who haven't and have treated it like easy money printing is where the landlord hate is coming from, in my opinion. poopinmymouth fucked around with this message at 19:40 on Mar 26, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 19:36
|
|
|
well anyway, thats another thing thats better served by good policy interestingly, some quick googlin leads me to believe that the amount of empty housing is many, many times the number of homeless people. I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone here in this thread at least that thinks that is a good outcome
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 19:38
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Who do you think would be first to complain if the unused housing was made available to those without homes? Maybe the group profiting of renting their housing to those without, yeah? "We can't have those types in our neighborhood!"
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 19:38
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Who do you think would be first to complain if the unused housing was made available to those without homes? Maybe the group profiting of renting their housing to those without, yeah? but they're not renting them, right? ^^^ this is the first group that would complain.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 19:38
|
|
|
Future aspiring landlord here, where can i pre purchase my own guillotine with my tenants security deposit?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 19:39
|
|
|
Now I’m really curious what’s going on here. Coordinated avatar replacements is a new tactic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 19:43
|
|
|
lol these avatars own v it also ignores the implication that somehow even more housing will help fix the problem of there being a vast inventory of empty housing. Ruzihm fucked around with this message at 19:49 on Mar 26, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 19:44
|
|
|
Thermopyle posted:If no one went into debt to own rental property there would not be enough housing supply. (AKA, rents would be even higher) How are you in BFC yet possess so little knowledge of the actual market? If you think that small time individuals are what move the market and not massive conglomerates then idk what to tell you fam. Also choppy Bois for the leeches itt, you know who you are
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 19:47
|
|
|
Jealous Cow posted:Now I’m really curious what’s going on here. Coordinated avatar replacements is a new tactic. My goodness, the proles are organizing?! Better call the Pinkertons before they start getting ideas!
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 19:54
|
|
|
I see that actual wealthy people are still successfully getting us to fight amongst ourselves.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 19:59
|
|
|
Jealous Cow posted:I see that actual wealthy people are still successfully getting us to fight amongst ourselves. Pretty rich coming from the petit bourgeois landlord
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 20:10
|
|
|
Jealous Cow posted:I see that actual wealthy people are still successfully getting us to fight amongst ourselves. yes we are truly all proles fighting the same fight. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 20:12
|
|
|
ThatBasqueGuy posted:How are you in BFC yet possess so little knowledge of the actual market? If you think that small time individuals are what move the market and not massive conglomerates then idk what to tell you fam. Wait a second, are you saying real estate conglomerates (and in fact almost every business on the planet) aren't using leverage? Do tell!  Thermopyle posted:interestingly, some quick googlin leads me to believe that the amount of empty housing is many, many times the number of homeless people. These empty houses still pay their property taxes, providing for the local community to an extent. While not a "good" outcome, it's perfectly reasonable to not try to tell people that they have to rent out their real property if they're not using it. It's certainly much better than letting homeless people into the houses to wreck the housing's value. That would be like telling exotic car owners they have to rent out their cars to randoms since they don't drive them very much and with much the same result.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 20:21
|
|
|
ThatBasqueGuy posted:How are you in BFC yet possess so little knowledge of the actual market? If you think that small time individuals are what move the market and not massive conglomerates then idk what to tell you fam. yeah, this is the thread all the REITs and what not are located at. good place to start the revolution
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 20:22
|
|
|
baquerd posted:Wait a second, are you saying real estate conglomerates (and in fact almost every business on the planet) aren't using leverage? Do tell! This the company you keep, landlords.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 20:23
|
|
|
baquerd posted:Wait a second, are you saying real estate conglomerates (and in fact almost every business on the planet) aren't using leverage? Do tell! Ehh except housing is a basic necessity and an exotic car has almost no utility. Not a great comparison. I have no problems with expanded funding for housing programs. Not sure I’m on board with compulsory letting. I’d prefer some other type of penalty for unproductive housing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 20:25
|
|
|
baquerd posted:It's certainly much better than letting homeless people into the houses to wreck the housing's value. its actually worse than that quote:No one's saying slaveowners were better than that, just that slaveowners that didn't take care of their slaves got sub-par returns over the long run. If you look at the most successful slave-owners, you would expect to see a general pattern of excellent treatment of well-behaved slaves. lmao i clicked the av text link Ruzihm fucked around with this message at 20:27 on Mar 26, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 20:25
|
|
|
baquerd posted:Wait a second, are you saying real estate conglomerates (and in fact almost every business on the planet) aren't using leverage? Do tell! To be clear, I was saying the combination of policies wherein you end up with markets with large amounts of empty housing and a homeless population is not a good set of policies.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 20:26
|
|
|
Jealous Cow posted:Ehh except housing is a basic necessity and an exotic car has almost no utility. Not a great comparison. Housing is a basic necessity, but specific housing is not. I also have no problems with expanded funding for housing programs or disincentivizing leaving houses open. My argument is that putting some random homeless people in a free 3bed/2bath in a nice neighborhood is probably going to end with the home value turned to poo poo the same way giving some random free access to a supercar is probably going to end in an expensive repair bill. They don't have any experience dealing with the maintenance, care, and handling of the responsibility being given to them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 20:29
|
|
|
baquerd posted:Housing is a basic necessity, but specific housing is not. I also have no problems with expanded funding for housing programs or disincentivizing leaving houses open. Well, we should have less 3/2 2500sqft homes in general but that’s a larger issue, and one I don’t exactly live up to. We should be building much higher density housing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 20:31
|
|
|
Jealous Cow posted:Well, we should have less 3/2 2500sqft homes in general but that’s a larger issue, and one I don’t exactly live up to. We should be building much higher density housing. The funny bit about this is that in California, where this is an especially egregious problem in some places like San Francisco, the "predatory" multi-national conglomerates are the ones who want this more than anyone while it's the private homeowners preventing this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 20:33
|
|
|
baquerd posted:Housing is a basic necessity, but specific housing is not. I also have no problems with expanded funding for housing programs or disincentivizing leaving houses open. And not just the home itself, but likely the surrounding homes. In other words, its the non-landlords, but landlords are an easier target. (Actually, there are a lot of lovely landlords)
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 20:34
|
|
|
baquerd posted:My argument is that putting some random homeless people in a free 3bed/2bath in a nice neighborhood is probably going to end with the home value turned to poo poo the same way giving some random free access to a supercar is probably going to end in an expensive repair bill. They don't have any experience dealing with the maintenance, care, and handling of the responsibility being given to them. destroying every supercar and giant house, and making their production far less profitable? two birds one stone babyyyyyy
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 20:36
|
|
|
what if instead we gave everyone an electric supercar and a giant house built out of solar panels
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 20:39
|
|
|
Thermopyle posted:And not just the home itself, but likely the surrounding homes. The way you implicitly demonize homeless people here is telling.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 20:40
|
|
|
Thermopyle posted:what if instead we gave everyone an electric supercar and a giant house built out of solar panels How about a super van, but put solar panels on that instead of doing a house? two birds one stone babyyyyyy 
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 20:41
|
|
|
Thermopyle posted:well anyway, thats another thing thats better served by good policy I think it would be extremely easy actually, because any action taken to fix that imbalance will inevitably require great financial sacrifice from landlords, which they are unwilling to do. that is born out by the fact that we exist in a system that has created these material conditions and sustains itself. if landlords in this thread wanted to change that system, they would, i don't know, do something about it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 20:55
|
|
|
Ruzihm posted:we have a vast inventory of empty housing units Congratulations, you've stumbled upon an argument as worthless as "taxation is theft."
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 20:59
|
|
|
Where I live the city's main landlords organize politically and buy politicians to protect their control over slum housing and they also interfere with oversight that would require them to fix problems like black mold and collapsed ceilings https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXJo0A9pUR0
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 21:05
|
|
|
tagesschau posted:Congratulations, you've stumbled upon an argument as worthless as "taxation is theft." where would we be without our vast inventory of empty houses? I should be more appreciative to the people who keep them that way 
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 21:07
|
|
|
Kobayashi posted:The way you implicitly demonize homeless people here is telling. I don't see how you can get that out of what I said.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 21:07
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:I think it would be extremely easy actually, because any action taken to fix that imbalance will inevitably require great financial sacrifice from landlords, I don't think that follows. Or rather, I don't think it follows from what I was claiming. To be explicit, I don't think most landlords ITT think its good that we ended up with a set of policies in some places that both lead to homlessness and lead to high rates of vacant homes. Likely, landlords would rather have a property generating income by renting to people who themselves have good incomes instead of owning vacant homes. This is a different claim from saying landlords ITT would favor taking actions from this point forward that caused them to lose money. Additionally, I don't think it follows that policies that reduce homelessness AND the amount of vacant homes requires financial sacrifice on the part of landlords. Thermopyle fucked around with this message at 21:15 on Mar 26, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 21:08
|
|
|
This is your friendly reminder that to hit the top 1% in total wealth you need to have over ten million dollars. People posting in this thread typically have 0-2 rental properties (hi! I joined this thread because I was considering renting out a single room in my only home!). In most markets that wouldn't even qualify you for top 5%; in plenty it wouldn't even crack the top 10%. You can feel free to be mad at the crabs at the top of the bucket, but you really should be wondering who the gently caress put us in this bucket and reserved the rest of the ocean for themselves.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 21:14
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:This is your friendly reminder that to hit the top 1% in total wealth you need to have over ten million dollars. People posting in this thread typically have 0-2 rental properties (hi! I joined this thread because I was considering renting out a single room in my only home!). In most markets that wouldn't even qualify you for top 5%; in plenty it wouldn't even crack the top 10%. The top 1% rely on the next 9% to uphold the system and gaslight the bottom 90% that all is fine. https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/559130/
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 21:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:58 |
|
|
lol as if the very instant a bill was floated that would expropriate the rental properties of the top 1% you wouldn't rally around them in bourgeois solidarity.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 21:22
|
|