Eviction for non-payment of rent is “good cause” for losing your Section 8 Voucher.
Eviction for causing damage to the rental premises will cause you to lose your Section 8 Voucher.
Eviction for causing disturbances on the property will cause loss of Section 8 Voucher.
Eviction for threatening or harassing other tenants will cause loss of Section 8 Voucher.
Eviction for having “unauthorized” people living with you who are not on the lease will mean loss of your Section 8 Voucher.
Being evicted for poor housekeeping will cause loss of Section 8 Voucher.
I admitted above that I may be biased, having seen only bad and never the good. I shouldn’t have spoken in such absolutes there. That said, I’ve probably spoken personally to more property owners who take section 8 than anyone here.
I’m not talking about appreciation. I’m talking about someone else paying your mortgage, and you keeping the house. That is profit. The house is the profit. The one you didn’t pay for because your tenant did.
This isn’t the place for a lesson on real estate investing, but your personal mortgage doesn’t translate to how the average investor runs his real estate business. If there are professional landlords out there getting a 30 year mortgage with 3% down, I don’t know a single one of them.
Just ask yourself this if you own your home: Could you rent out your house for the same price as your PITI, plus an allowance for maintenance, management, vacancy, and profit on top? With very very few exceptions, the answer to that question is a resounding “absolutely not and it’s not close.”
I still don’t know exactly what the purpose of this thread is, but this particular derail is definitely not it. Suffice to say that this equity you’re talking about is part of the return calculation, and returns in real estate investing are usually not great unless you can create equity by buying distressed properties. Think those dudes on TV in the 90s at 3am trying to get you to buy their $200 “course” on making a billion dollars. There’s a reason they’re hawking cassettes on TV and not just following their own advice.
lol I currently help a buddy manage a building where 35/60 units are section 8 housing and have worked for management companies with 3000+ units over the last couple of years. All you are doing here is spouting the landlords extremely biased view on section 8 tenants, so keep licking those boots.
Almost every single complaint i’ve heard from landlords about section 8 tenants is something their regular tenants do at the same or in some cases a higher rate. I have guesses as to why they like to use the section 8 tenants as examples of all this but I don’t think this thread is intended for that so I’ll just stop continuing the derail after this.
Posted in another thread previously but the point still stands.
I’ll add anyone claiming there isn’t any profit in being a landlord is either a slumlord, terrible at their job, or just lying. Likely some combination of all three.
Also, if you really want to get your outrage on, I suggest reading into TIFs.
But ignoring that, the “profit on top” part is what drives me nuts. Like, you get a mortgage for 1500 bucks/month. So 18k/year. Figure maintenance averages 5k/year, which I think is likely way overboard but whatever. 23k/year out of pocket.
If you get a tenant to pay you even 1200/month, 14.4k/year, you’ve got an updated repaired house for 9k/year that would normally be 18k plus maintenance. That’s profit. You’re getting 50% off of your mortgage, and you can sell the house when you’re done with appreciation. And all of the money you’re spending on it is tax deductible. Oh, and if it’s new construction you’re almost certainly getting a ton of tax breaks on the property taxes for deigning to build housing in whatever jurisdiction you work in.
Like, the fucking greed and entitlement of landlords is just astounding to me. Market rate for rent is always higher than a 30 year mortgage. You guys make your living purely on the fact that people can’t afford down payments and realtors are even bigger pieces of pond scum than you, making it prohibitively expensive to purchase property for short term living.
Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner. Everyone has to buy the landlord a chicken dinner.
Landlordism doesn’t “create” housing (construction workers build buildings), “do” maintenance (that’s typically done by handymen, gardeners/etc), or even “show” units (that’s typically done by employees too).
Every single bit of legitimate work that is done regarding rental housing is typically done by working folk earning wages. Landlordism claims to “do” all this crap. It has nothing to do with any of it at all.
Instead, Landlordism is the leveraging the use of violence (evictions) to extract unearned and absentee profits from those who are stuck in the Rent System: those who need housing, but can’t buy housing.
It literally is free money, but you have to have money to begin with. It’s like the small scale version of owning a pro sports team. You get to profit in the short term while having the tax loopholes and accounting tricks on your side to make it look like you’re losing money. And in the long term when it’s time to sell, amazingly this asset that never made money has greatly appreciated in value!
I mean there are lots of things I could do to make more money than I currently do.
I don’t have nearly enough money to purchase rental properties, but if I DID have that kind of money I’d be much more likely to try to develop something like a community land trust.
I bought three apartment buildings in my twenties and didn’t put $0.01 down. I suppose I made a little money in this, very little money, but it was hardly easy and it was not without lots of work, real physical work.
I think much worse, although I’d be interested to hear the opinion of someone who disagrees.
I think that an individual landlord tends to have a more directly negative impact on people’s lives than an individual who has like 3 shares of AMZN or BP in his 401k. Contributing a tiny bit to corporate evil deeds or a lot to the year to year finances/wealth of someone with less money than you.
They almost are, property taxes increase but they just pass that burden onto the tenant and their workload stays unaffected while the tenant might have to pick up more hours for the landlords property taxes going up. Most of the time landlords use 2-2.5% increases (which is what it has been in Chicago the last couple of years) as a justification to raise a tenants rent 5-10% so they make a profit off of the property tax increase too.
I was mostly being snarky. When they rent their property, they are landlords and they pass the property taxes on to their renters. When they’re not renting, they’re not landlords. Your post was better.