|
Simpsons Reference posted:Alright, I'm reopening it without handing out probations, but with a word of caution: ThatBasqueGuy posted:Does collective ownership count for the purposes of the thread topic? Wiggly Wayne DDS posted:whole lot of private landlords whining, is there a social housing thread for comparison?
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 13:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 09:20 |
|
|
Are there any examples of successful efforts to build cooperative structures that work to keep rents down and pool excess capital into acquiring stock out of the hands of usurers and making it more social? Like a sort of cooperative social housing intitiave? Obviously the UK has/had good state run social housing but given its propensity for being flogged off at the drop of a hat by poo poo governments it'd be nice if there were some sort of model that saw success without needing to be government backed, as insurance.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 14:31
|
|
|
hi, good faith question: landlords extremely bad y/n? show working! (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 14:41
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Are there any examples of successful efforts to build cooperative structures that work to keep rents down and pool excess capital into acquiring stock out of the hands of usurers and making it more social? Like a sort of cooperative social housing intitiave? Obviously the UK has/had good state run social housing but given its propensity for being flogged off at the drop of a hat by poo poo governments it'd be nice if there were some sort of model that saw success without needing to be government backed, as insurance. as far as tenant involvement as a rule the board overseeing an org will be a mix of tenants (service users), homeowners (due to factoring), and some professionals in housing. the bleeding's stemmed from the right-to-buy scheme being abolished in scotland, but its still a dangerous thorn elsewhere where it's selling off assets at well below market-value.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 14:45
|
|
|
I guess my next question would be how... good... are HA's I guess? Like I guess margin wise. Cos obviously the rent in an area's gonna be market driven so a large presence of deliberately lowered rents is gonna drive the private landlords down too, but in terms of absolute rent margins over the costs to maintain the houses, how do they compare to I guess government backed social housing? Cos that does generally make money for the LA doesn't it? Are they comparable? Or perhaps is there some very obvious differences you can see in areas with lots of HA penetration vs areas that don't have them in terms of rents?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 14:56
|
|
|
i can't really speak to how it would compare to a government initiative. obviously that'd be the ideal scenario, but HAs aren't too different. LAs are still covered by the regulators, so think of them as bigger HAs with more in-house services. as far as financial margin it'd vary based on HA, but all of the regulatory returns are public with full datasets available: https://www.scottishhousingregulator.gov.uk/find-and-compare-landlords/statistical-information rent increases are aligned with inflation with some opting to increase every couple of years but a larger amount, and some every year. this would be decided by the board and a set of options given to the tenants with, say, 3% or 3.5% where 3.5% would bring additional money in to improve x, y and z. you'd think everyone would always go for the lowest option, but uh, that isn't always the case. the biggest hurdle is dealing with private landlords who don't want to do anything but the absolute minimum to maintain their properties and keep their tenants safe. mortgage-to-rent does exist for existing homeowners to join, but the houses aren't fully upgraded until the existing tenant leaves outside of the planned programmes so they're of a mixed quality (but what the original owner wanted so...)
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 15:08
|
|
|
People are starting to talk expropriation in Berlin. https://twitter.com/thenation/status/1111074690909593601 I would think this would actually be easier in the U.S. because the court's have given cities expansive eminent domain powers. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 15:09
|
|
|
Wiggly Wayne DDS posted:i can't really speak to how it would compare to a government initiative. obviously that'd be the ideal scenario, but HAs aren't too different. LAs are still covered by the regulators, so think of them as bigger HAs with more in-house services. That's decidedly better than I'd have expected honestly. Cheering.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 15:19
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:People are starting to talk expropriation in Berlin. They should do this with owners running Airbnb hotels first. I stayed in an Airbnb in Oslo a few years ago and the host owned 32 units in that building alone, and more in other nearby buildings. That must drive rents insanely high. It’s just too tempting to charge $150/night rather than $2000/mo, regardless of the risk. The lady had full time cleaning staff to turn over the units.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 15:20
|
|
|
AirBnb is absolutely part of the problem but diversity of tactics is cool and good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 15:22
|
|
|
Simpsons Reference posted:Alright, I'm reopening it without handing out probations, but with a word of caution: They do actually The tools are subsequently picked up, dusted off, and given to a scab. ThomasPaine posted:hi, good faith question: landlords extremely bad y/n? show working! A post I wanted to respond to while the thread was locked, from early in the invasion, posited that investment is a perfectly normal and rational thing to do when one has excess money. I agree but would like to posit that if you're looking for a low effort investment opportunity, you could do pretty well out of buying shares in munitions companies; in these troubled times, war is a real growth market. You know, if you feel the human impact of your financial practices doesn't actually matter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 15:22
|
|
|
Landlords are lower than leeches. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 15:30
|
|
|
I know I've seen good effort posts and links to articles about the Vienna model for housing. Anyone got that to hand? I think it's worth bringing up as there was one poster literally claiming that if they didn't buy and rent out houses, then their tenants would literally be homeless for decades. He just couldn't conceive of any system different to the one that he exists in.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 15:34
|
|
|
i love that the mod guy thinks the guillotine stuff is ironic (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 15:35
|
|
|
Jealous Cow posted:They should do this with owners running Airbnb hotels first. I stayed in an Airbnb in Oslo a few years ago and the host owned 32 units in that building alone, and more in other nearby buildings. That must drive rents insanely high. It’s just too tempting to charge $150/night rather than $2000/mo, regardless of the risk. Yeah, in New Orleans, these AirBnBs were actually expropriated to begin with. The city goes on sprees of condemning buildings and then auctioning them off to wealthy developers who then turn them into AirBnBs and completely gently caress the property value in a neighborhood up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 15:40
|
|
|
Renaissance Robot posted:A post I wanted to respond to while the thread was locked, from early in the invasion, posited that investment is a perfectly normal and rational thing to do when one has excess money. As an aside, the Berkshire B shares being listed by themselves are a little misleading, since Berkshire Hathaway shares are effectively just their own mutual fund.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 15:46
|
|
|
NZAmoeba posted:I know I've seen good effort posts and links to articles about the Vienna model for housing. Anyone got that to hand? Fuckin lol The only way to stop homelessness is by me buying up former council housing, splitting the property into two properties and then renting it out for double the council rate. Really I'm a humanitarian when you think about it. No DSS.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 15:53
|
|
|
NZAmoeba posted:I know I've seen good effort posts and links to articles about the Vienna model for housing. Anyone got that to hand? Motronic posted:So did this end up in another subforum? (checks...no)
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 15:55
|
|
|
Rent increases should be tied to a tenant's wages. That way landlords and businesses can deal directly with each other, and those of us who want to live can ignore that horseshit.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 16:02
|
|
|
Boot and Rally posted:Rent increases should be tied to a tenant's wages. That way landlords and businesses can deal directly with each other, and those of us who want to live can ignore that horseshit. Yeah, you could even account for marginal utility by having higher earners pay proportionally more, and low earners propertionally less. To make things easier, you could have the money collected by a central agency of some kind, an "in-land revenue collection service" if you will And if there's one agency collecting the money, youay as well have another block managing the properties in the community... 
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 16:06
|
|
|
Hey, I'm making a lot of money from my tenants need for shelter but I'm trying to do more. Anyone know where I could get some human sized coin operated food and water dispensers? I'm thinking something like what you see in a hamster cage. I'll install them and ban outside food in the lease. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 17:42
|
|
|
Wiggly Wayne DDS posted:is there a social housing thread for comparison? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 18:09
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:Hey, I'm making a lot of money from my tenants need for shelter but I'm trying to do more. Anyone know where I could get some human sized coin operated food and water dispensers? I'm thinking something like what you see in a hamster cage. I'll install them and ban outside food in the lease. open a subway
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 19:31
|
|
|
brian posted:i love that the mod guy thinks the guillotine stuff is ironic
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 19:47
|
|
|
We bought a 900sqft condo 7 years ago and lived in it for 6 years fixing it up as we went. We put probably 12Gs into it over that time. We were planning on renting it out to a couple trust-fund college kids since its the nicest condo on the property, but now I'm thinking to just sell it so that someone else gets to own something and accrue net worth. Even if i only charged them what my carrying costs are, id still be depriving someone else of starter-home ownership for my greed reasons. Even though i only have those greed reasons because everyone I owe money to has greed reasons, but gently caress it, the cycle has to stop somewhere. I'm gonna sell that thing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 19:49
|
|
|
Marxist-Jezzinist posted:open a subway Hey dude, too your advice but not really sure how it helps. Now my house has trains running through it and homeless people sleeping in it which is pretty much the exact opposite of renting.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 19:50
|
|
|
Scamming trust fund kids is praxis dumbass
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 19:52
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:Hey, I'm making a lot of money from my tenants need for shelter but I'm trying to do more. Anyone know where I could get some human sized coin operated food and water dispensers? I'm thinking something like what you see in a hamster cage. I'll install them and ban outside food in the lease. Depending on the air quality where you own, I hear canned air vending machines are a pretty good investment opportunity
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 19:53
|
|
|
Nukes to Saudi A! posted:We bought a 900sqft condo 7 years ago and lived in it for 6 years fixing it up as we went. We put probably 12Gs into it over that time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 20:00
|
|
|
Nukes to Saudi A! posted:We bought a 900sqft condo 7 years ago and lived in it for 6 years fixing it up as we went. We put probably 12Gs into it over that time. This is a pretty cool post.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 20:06
|
|
|
I rent a house and sublet the in-law suite because we don't need the space. Do they make kits for those who want to self-guillotine?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 20:10
|
|
|
Hoodwinker posted:Alternatively, you could leverage the asset towards social good by renting it out and funneling your rental profit towards charitable interests such that you would be doing more for systemic problems than providing just one person or family with that opportunity. You don't have to sell it to do good. The fastest way to redistribute wealth is to distribute it direct to the people that need it. Charities are so entrenched within the social system that they cannot effect the radical change that is needed because they are dependent on the upper classes continuing to bestow them funding. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 20:49
|
|
|
Rarity posted:The fastest way to redistribute wealth is to distribute it direct to the people that need it. Charities are so entrenched within the social system that they cannot effect the radical change that is needed because they are dependent on the upper classes continuing to bestow them funding. This. Your best bet, if you wanted the "optimal" dollar for dollar value in mitigating suffering and social good, would be donating the cash to strike funds, cooperative enterprises (housing, solar, "green", etc...), mutual aid projects, and the like. poo poo that actually makes demands of and is willing to do what it takes to get at least a slice of the pie redistributed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 20:55
|
|
|
ThatBasqueGuy posted:This. Your best bet, if you wanted the "optimal" dollar for dollar value in mitigating suffering and social good, would be donating the cash to strike funds, cooperative enterprises (housing, solar, "green", etc...), mutual aid projects, and the like. poo poo that actually makes demands of and is willing to do what it takes to get at least a slice of the pie redistributed. It's even better then if you're renting to trust-fund college kids because you're directly redistributing elitist wealth to social causes! How's that for hacking the system?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 21:00
|
|
|
Hoodwinker posted:I wasn't trying to specify that it had to be charities, per se, just that you would be providing your own charity towards whatever agencies interest you. What you're describing is exactly where I think the money could be going! If you sell, the next person might be given an opportunity they didn't have at best, or at worst will end up perpetuating the cycle by renting it/selling it/AirBnBing it (without intending to use that profit for what we're discussing). If you keep it and use its profits for social good, this provides you with direct agency in breaking the cycle for as long as you control it, instead of just breaking the cycle for this one singular transaction. But if we're talking ethical responsibility here then it doesn't change the fact that by doing so you're perpetuating a broken housing system that exists to extract wealth from the poor to put it in the hands of the rich and directly consigning a person/family to a continued existence within that cycle and if you're looking to act from a place of moral good then that's undercutting your charitable giving.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 21:06
|
|
|
Rarity posted:But if we're talking ethical responsibility here then it doesn't change the fact that by doing so you're perpetuating a broken housing system that exists to extract wealth from the poor to put it in the hands of the rich and directly consigning a person/family to a continued existence within that cycle and if you're looking to act from a place of moral good then that's undercutting your charitable giving. Remember: this one shot you've got requires you to accurately gauge the worthiness of the person you are hoping to provide this charitable opportunity to (and offering to sell at a lower price than you could command is a charitable act, since you're giving up your own chance at resources). Maybe the person squanders this opportunity later on and the effort is meaningless. Maybe they go on to do great things. It's a tough situation to judge. But if you make a mistake and the person has fooled you and is actually a shitlord (or more likely, it just doesn't have any lasting impact on the system at large), you don't get a do-over, and society doesn't get better because you tried your best. Meanwhile, if you forego this more direct opportunity and take the systemic approach, even if the agencies you provide funding to fail in their objectives, you've still created competition amongst the system against the agencies you are actively seeking to destroy, weakening them. I'll take it in the other direction too: if you choose an agency that actively does harm to your objectives, you've made the whole system worse at a greater scale. This is almost literally the Trolley Problem. There's no simple answer. Hoodwinker fucked around with this message at 21:18 on Mar 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 21:16
|
|
|
It's actually pretty simple. Systemic issues exist because people don't make an effort to fix them and allow systems to continue. The solution is to not be part of the problem and actively fight against the problem. If everyone does that then it's not a problem.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 21:21
|
|
|
Hoodwinker posted:It's true, but aren't you undercutting it either way? You could be redistributing the wealth you acquire towards more systemically impactful efforts to correct the system. This situation isn't lacking in moral ambiguity: you can provide one guaranteed moral transaction in a broken system at the expense of funneling resources into rectifying issues with that system, or you can choose to sacrifice a smaller moral good for a greater one. Given the opportunity, I would rather seek to rectify the system using my resources than offer one temporary and potentially impotent solution. Becoming a landlord is a good way to turn the probably-harmless sentiment of leasing to "a couple trust-fund college kids" into genuine animosity for fellow human beings. It sets up a bad power dynamic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 21:22
|
|
|
Short of full autonomous gay luxury space communism, are there solutions palatable to the American electorate?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 21:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 09:20 |
|
|
Rarity posted:It's actually pretty simple. Systemic issues exist because people don't make an effort to fix them and allow systems to continue. The solution is to not be part of the problem and actively fight against the problem. If everyone does that then it's not a problem. To bring it back to the specific example we're discussing: why would this specific example be a boon towards the intended outcome (disengaging from the broken system) instead of simply being absorbed by the system that incentives otherwise? That's why I'm in favor of the systemic solution: it operates at the appropriate level of abstraction - the system - instead of at the level of the individual operation. Kobayashi posted:Becoming a landlord is a good way to turn the probably-harmless sentiment of leasing to "a couple trust-fund college kids" into genuine animosity for fellow human beings. It sets up a bad power dynamic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 21:37
|
|